FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

DENNIS J. HUBEL, Magistrate Judge.

This 42 U.S.C. 1983 case was removed from Multnomah County Circuit Court on August 15, 2012. On September 21, 2012, the court set a Rule 16 Conference by telephone for November 5, 2012, at 10:00 a.m., and mailed a copy of the notice to plaintiff Melinda Wilson ("Wilson") at her address of record: 317 N.E. Killingsworth Ave., Portland, Oregon 97211. The notice was not returned to the court. On November 5, 2012, the court placed the conference call. After calling the only two telephone numbers included in the record for Wilson, both of which appeared to be disconnected numbers, the court called a third telephone number, which was provided by defense counsel, and was connected to Wilson's voice mail. She was not available.

On November 7, 2012, the court entered an order requiring Wilson to show cause in writing as to why this case should not be dismissed for failure to attend the Rule 16 Conference on November 5, 2012, and failure to prosecute her civil claims. A show cause hearing date was set for January 7, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. Notably, the show cause order made clear that, unless Wilson provided the court with a reliable telephone number at which she could be reached by December 28, 2012, the January 7 hearing would take place in person in Courtroom #9B, Mark O. Hatfield Courthouse, 1000 S.W. Third Ave., Portland, Oregon. Wilson was also warned that failure to comply with the order would result in a dismissal of this action, without prejudice.

On November 28, 2012, Wilson filed a response to the order to show cause, wherein she generally reiterated and elaborated on the allegations set forth in her complaint. Wilson also provided her address and telephone number. She offered no explanation for failing to attend the November 5, 2012 Rule 16 conference.

On January 7, 2012, counsel for the defendant, City of Portland, appeared in person for the show cause hearing. The court attempted to reach Wilson by telephone, at the number it confirmed was the current and accurate telephone number for Wilson, but the call was immediately connected only to her voice mail once again. Wilson also failed to appear in person for the proceeding in lieu of a phone appearance, as required by the order to show cause.

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends that this case be dismissed without prejudice based on Wilson's failure to prosecute and to comply with court orders to attend two hearings ordered by the court. See Kent v. City of Sacramento, No. 2:07-cv-02361, 2011 WL 6012413, at *4 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 1, 2011) (explaining that courts can dismiss a pro se plaintiff's action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) sua sponte for failing to prosecute or comply with the rules of civil procedure or the court's orders).

SCHEDULING ORDER

The Findings and Recommendation will be referred to a district judge. Objections, if any, are due January 28, 2013. If no objections are filed, then the Findings and Recommendation will go under advisement on that date. If objections are filed, then a response is due February 14, 2013. When the response is due or filed, whichever date is earlier, the Findings and Recommendation will go under advisement.