Shpitj et al v. Petaluma Skilled Nursing & Wellness Centre, LLC et al

Filing 20


Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 LUDMILA SHPITJ, Plaintiff, 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 No. C 11-02072 JSW v. ORDER DISMISSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE PETALUMA SKILLED NURSING, 13 Defendants. / 14 15 On July 12, 2011, the Court issued an Order regarding information it had received 16 regarding the fact that Plaintiff Fred Labankoff required additional time to file an amended 17 complaint by July 15, 2011, and stated that unless any party had any information to the 18 contrary, it would grant Plaintiffs an additional thirty days to file an amended complaint. On 19 July 12, 2011, Mr. Labankoff also filed a request for an extension of time, which shall be 20 docketed forthwith. The Court granted that request and ordered Plaintiffs to file an amended 21 complaint by no later than September 16, 2011. The Court advised Plaintiffs that if they failed 22 to file an amended complaint by that date, or failed to file an additional request for an extension 23 of time showing good cause, the Court would dismiss the case without prejudice. 24 On August 16, 2011, the Court received a letter from Mr. Labankoff’s mother, Svetlana 25 Labankoff, in which she advised the Court that Mr. Labankoff had passed away. In that letter, 26 she appears to ask the Court for legal advice as to how to proceed with the complaint filed by 27 Mr. Labankoff and her sister, Ludmila Shpitj. 28 // 1 The Court construed letter as a request for additional time to file an amended complaint 2 and, on September 2, 2011, the Court granted Plaintiff one final extension of time to file an 3 amended complaint. In the Order, the Court directed that any amended complaint was due by 4 no later than December 2, 2011, and if the Court did not receive an amended complaint by that 5 date, it would dismiss these claims without prejudice and without further notice. 6 The Court has not received an amended complaint. Accordingly, the Court HEREBY 7 DISMISSES this matter WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute. The Clerk shall 8 close the file. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: December 7, 2011 JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE 3 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 5 LUDMILA SHPITJ et al, Case Number: CV11-02072 JSW 6 Plaintiff, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 7 v. 8 PETALUMA SKILLED NURSING et al, 9 Defendant. / 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. 12 District Court, Northern District of California. 13 That on December 7, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter 14 listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. 15 16 17 Fred G. Labankoff 3828 Skyfarm Drive 18 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 19 Ludmila Shpitj 523 Hayes Lane 20 Petaluma, CA 94952 21 Dated: December 7, 2011 22 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?