Ewing v. Charter Communications Holding Company, 3:17-cv-0222-BEN-WVG. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20191017630
Visitors: 5
Filed: Oct. 10, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 10, 2019
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION UNDER CIV. L. R. 41.1 ROGER T. BENITEZ , District Judge . On December 5, 2017, the Court granted Defendant Charter Communications Holding Company's motion to compel arbitration and to stay. Doc. 13. On October 8, 2019, the Court held a Rule 41.1 dismissal hearing. Doc. 18. Dante T. Pride appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. James J. Hawk appeared on behalf of Defendants. This written order follows. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 41.1, the Court may
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION UNDER CIV. L. R. 41.1 ROGER T. BENITEZ , District Judge . On December 5, 2017, the Court granted Defendant Charter Communications Holding Company's motion to compel arbitration and to stay. Doc. 13. On October 8, 2019, the Court held a Rule 41.1 dismissal hearing. Doc. 18. Dante T. Pride appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. James J. Hawk appeared on behalf of Defendants. This written order follows. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 41.1, the Court may ..
More
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION UNDER CIV. L. R. 41.1
ROGER T. BENITEZ, District Judge.
On December 5, 2017, the Court granted Defendant Charter Communications Holding Company's motion to compel arbitration and to stay. Doc. 13. On October 8, 2019, the Court held a Rule 41.1 dismissal hearing. Doc. 18. Dante T. Pride appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. James J. Hawk appeared on behalf of Defendants. This written order follows.
Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 41.1, the Court may dismiss an action for want of prosecution if no proceedings or discovery have been taken in that action for more than six months. Civ. L.R. 41.1(a). At the hearing, the Court confirmed with the parties that no action whatsoever had occurred on this matter for approximately 20 months, including any action to initiate arbitration. The Court then dismissed the case for want of prosecution under Civil Local Rule 41.1. Because the Court dismisses the action without prejudice, there is no prejudice to the parties or to the administration of justice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
