Charles Paddock v. Dreamworks Animation SKG, Inc. et al

Filing 58

ORDER DISMISSING CASE by Judge S. James Otero. The deadline to amend the Complaint has passed, and no amended complaint has been filed. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the case for failure to prosecute. This matter shall close Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (shb)

Download PDF
JS-6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL DATE: April 24, 2015 CASE NO.: CV 14-06053 SJO (Ex) TITLE: Priority Send Enter Closed JS-5/JS-6 Scan Only Charles Paddock v. Dreamworks Animation SKG, Inc., et al. ======================================================================== PRESENT: THE HONORABLE S. JAMES OTERO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Victor Paul Cruz Courtroom Clerk Not Present Court Reporter COUNSEL PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: COUNSEL PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS: Not Present Not Present ======================================================================== PROCEEDINGS (in chambers): ORDER DISMISSING CASE This matter is before the Court on its own motion. On December 22, 2014, Defendants DreamWorks Animation SKG, Inc. ("DreamWorks"), Lewis W. Coleman, and Jeffrey Katzenberg's (collectively, "Defendants") filed a Motion to Dismiss ("Motion"). On April 1, 2015, the Court issued an order granting the Motion with a fifteen-day leave to amend. (See Order, ECF No. 56.) On April 16, 2015, Lead Plaintiff Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund filed a Notice of Intent Not to Amend. (Notice, ECF No. 57.) The deadline to amend the Complaint has passed, and no amended complaint has been filed. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the case for failure to prosecute. This matter shall close. IT IS SO ORDERED. Page 1 of 1

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?