Santiago v. Anthony Annucci

Background

On September 24, 2021, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss Santiago’s claims. The court dismissed the claims without prejudice and gave Santiago 30 days to file a fourth amended complaint addressing deficiencies identified in the earlier opinion and order. Santiago did not file that complaint within 30 days and had not filed one by the time of this order.

On March 8, 2022, the court ordered Santiago to show cause—meaning to explain—by March 29 why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. A copy of that order was mailed to Santiago. He did not respond, file a fourth amended complaint, or otherwise communicate with the court. The opinion states that his last communication with the court about the case was on March 19, 2021.

Court’s reasoning

The court relied on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which permits involuntary dismissal when a plaintiff fails to prosecute a case or comply with court rules or an order. The court also stated that a district court has authority to dismiss a case for failure to prosecute on its own initiative. Such a dismissal is a severe remedy that should be used only in extreme situations, so courts consider the length of the delay, notice that continued delay could lead to dismissal, possible prejudice to the defendant, the balance between court congestion and the plaintiff’s opportunity to be heard, and whether lesser sanctions would work.

The court concluded that these factors favored dismissal. Santiago had twice been ordered to file a fourth amended complaint and had been warned that failing to do so could result in dismissal. He also did not respond to the order to show cause or otherwise contact the court.

Disposition

Judge Kenneth M. Karas dismissed Santiago’s case without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail Santiago a copy of the order.