MARTINEZ v. ALAMEDA COUNTY, 15-cv-5342-CRB. (2017)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20170410597
Visitors: 16
Filed: Mar. 28, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING CASE CHARLES R. BREYER , District Judge . On April 21, 2016, Plaintiff failed to appear for a case management conference. See CMC (dkt. 16). On March 10, 2017, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause within 14 days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, as nothing had been filed since. See OSC (dkt. 17). Plaintiff did not respond within that time period. The Court therefore DISMISSES the case WITH PREJUDICE under Federal Rule of Civil Procedur
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING CASE CHARLES R. BREYER , District Judge . On April 21, 2016, Plaintiff failed to appear for a case management conference. See CMC (dkt. 16). On March 10, 2017, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause within 14 days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, as nothing had been filed since. See OSC (dkt. 17). Plaintiff did not respond within that time period. The Court therefore DISMISSES the case WITH PREJUDICE under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure..
More
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
CHARLES R. BREYER, District Judge.
On April 21, 2016, Plaintiff failed to appear for a case management conference. See CMC (dkt. 16). On March 10, 2017, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause within 14 days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, as nothing had been filed since. See OSC (dkt. 17). Plaintiff did not respond within that time period. The Court therefore DISMISSES the case WITH PREJUDICE under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See Semtek Intern. Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 531 U.S. 497, 505 (2001).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
