SAGER v. U.S.

No. 15-1388T.

LOUIS J. SAGER, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant.

United States Court of Federal Claims.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1491
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1491 Tucker Act
Nature of Suit: 212 Tax - Income, Individual
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

LOUIS J. SAGER, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

USA, Defendant, represented by Margaret Elizabeth Sheer , U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division.


DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

THOMAS C. WHEELER, Judge.

The Court, by its own motion, dismisses Mr. Sager's complaint for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b) of the Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC"). On January 23, 2017, the Government filed a motion for summary judgment. Mt. No. 10. Mr. Sager failed to respond to the Government's motion by the Court's February 23, 2017 deadline. On March 9, 2017, the Court issued an order directing Mr. Sager to respond to the Government's motion by March 16, 2017, including a statement explaining why the Court should not dismiss Mr. Sager's complaint for failure to prosecute. Duct. No. 17. In its order, the Court warned Mr. Sager that failure to comply with the Court's order would result in dismissal of his complaint. Id. Mr. Sager did not file a response on or before March 16, 2017.

RCFC 41(b) provides that "[i]f the plaintiff fails to prosecute or comply with these rules or a court order, the court may dismiss on its own motion or the defendant may move to dismiss the action or any claim against it." Rule 41(b) is a necessary tool to ensure efficient docket management and prevent undue delays in litigation. Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962). "While dismissal of a claim is a harsh action, especially to a pro se litigant, it is justified when a party fails to pursue litigation diligently and disregards the court's rules and show cause order." Whiting v. United States, 99 Fed. Cl. 13, 17 (2011) (citing Kadin Corp. v. United States, 782 F.2d 175, 176-77 (Fed. Cir. 1986)). Here, Mr. Sager failed to respond to the Government's motion for summary judgment and to the Court's show cause order. Dismissal is therefore not only appropriate, but required to maintain judicial efficiency and conserve court resources.

Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute in accordance with Rule 41(b). The Clerk is directed to enter judgment for the Government.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases