Judge Edgardo Ramos
Punitive segregation led inmate Virola to become depressed and self-harm. He alleged that defendant Rosenthal—a mental health clinician assigned to the “GRVC Mental Health Team”—was indifferent to his medical needs. Virola’s 2012 amended complaint named Rosenthal the sole defendant. The court’s June 18, 2013, order set deadlines for defendants’ proposed motion for summary judgment. A copy of the scheduling order mailed to Viola’s last known address was returned as “refused-unable to forward.” On Jan. 28, 2014, the court received, as returned and undeliverable, its Jan. 15 order directing Virola’s response to defendants’ motion. Noting that it was Virola’s duty to inform its pro se office of any change of address the district court, balancing the five factors articulated in U.S. ex rel. Drake v. Norden Sys. Inc. and Shannon v. General Elec. Co., dismissed Virola’s claims for failure to prosecute. Both defendants’ summary judgment papers and the Jan. 15 order put Virola on notice that failure to respond may result in dismissal of his claims. Deeming defendants prejudiced by Virola’s delay, the court concluded that because he failed to maintain contact with the court, dismissal of Virola’s claims—rather than an extension of time—was appropriate.
