Brasure v. Alabaster Wholesale Nursery et al
Filing
29
ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 11/6/13. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/7/2013)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
SPENSER BRASURE, Agent for
INDEPENDENT CATERERS, INC.,
No. C 13-2277 JCS (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
5
Plaintiff,
6
7
8
v.
ALABASTER WHOLESALE NURSERY,
et al.,
9
Defendants.
/
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
The original complaint was dismissed with leave to amend because the allegations
12
were conclusory and undetailed, it was not clear that this Court had jurisdiction, and plaintiff,
13
who is not an attorney, brought this action on behalf of a corporation, which may appear only
14
through counsel. See 28 U.S.C. § 1654; Civil L.R. 3-9(b); Employee Painters’ Trust v. Ethan
15
Enterprises, Inc., 480 F.3d 993, 998 (9th Cir. 2007).
16
The amended complaint fails to cure the deficiencies of the first. Accordingly, this
17
action is DISMISSED.1 Because this dismissal is without prejudice, plaintiff may move to
18
reopen the action. Any such motion must (1) be made through counsel; (2) contain an
19
amended complaint alleging clear, detailed claims regarding each defendant; and (3) show
20
that this Court has jurisdiction.
21
IT IS SO ORDERED.
22
DATED: November 6, 2013
JOSEPH C. SPERO
United States Magistrate Judge
23
24
25
26
27
1
Plaintiff has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. The magistrate, then, has jurisdiction
to issue this order, even though defendants have not been served or consented to magistrate jurisdiction.
See Neals v. Norwood, 59 F.3d 530, 532 (5th Cir. 1995) (holding that magistrate judge had jurisdiction
to dismiss prisoners action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as frivolous without consent of defendants because
they had not been served and therefore were not parties).
28
No. C 13-2277 JCS (PR)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
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?