1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA
7
TOBY MASSE, Case No. 3:25-cv-05839-TMC
8
Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
9
WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO
v. PROSECUTE
10
CLARK COUNTY, et al.,
11
Defendants.
12
13
14 On September 18, 2025, pro se plaintiff Toby Masse filed an application to proceed in
15 forma pauperis (“IFP”) and attached a copy of his proposed complaint. Dkts. 1, 1-1. On
16 September 23, 2025, Magistrate Judge Theresa L. Fricke granted Mr. Masse’s application to
17 proceed IFP but recommended review of the complaint because “it does not appear Plaintiff has
18 met the criteria for IFP required under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b).” Dkt. 3 at 1. On November 3,
19 2025, Judge Fricke’s order—which had been mailed to Mr. Masse’s address in Vancouver,
20 Washington—was returned to the Court as undeliverable. Dkt. 5.
21 On November 5, 2025, the Court reviewed Mr. Masse’s complaint under § 1915 and
22 found that it did not state a plausible claim for relief. Dkt. 6. The Court outlined the deficiencies
23
24
1 in Mr. Masse’s claims and granted him 21 days to amend the complaint or face dismissal.
2
Dkt. 6 at 4.1
3 The deadline has passed, and Mr. Masse did not amend his complaint. Therefore, the
4 Court dismisses this case without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)
5 (allowing for involuntary dismissal for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with the federal
6 rules or court orders); Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th
7 Cir. 2005) (courts may dismiss cases sua sponte pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute);
8 Oliva v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 272, 274 (9th Cir. 1992) (“The district judge has an obligation to
9 warn the plaintiff that dismissal is imminent.”).
10 The Clerk is directed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and
11 to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.
12
13 Dated this 12th day of December, 2025.
14
a
15
Tiffany M. Cartwright
16 United States District Judge
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 1 This order was also returned as undeliverable on December 9, 2025. Dkt. 7. Under Local Rule
41(b)(2), Mr. Masse “bears the burden of keeping the court apprised of any changes in his
24 mailing address.” Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988).
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.