Kohli v. San Francisco Police Department

Filing 24

ORDER DISMISSING WITH PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE. Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 5/13/14. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/13/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

12
13

AMRIT KOHLI,
Plaintiff,

14
15

Case No. 13-cv-04305 NC
ORDER DISMISSING WITH
PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE

v.
SAN FRANCISCO POLICE

16 DEPARTMENT,
17

Defendant.

18
19

The Court previously dismissed plaintiff Kohli’s complaint with leave to amend for

20 failure to state a claim. Dkt. No. 20. The Court simultaneously issued an order to show
21 cause why Kohli’s complaint should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, as Kohli had
22 not opposed defendant’s motion to dismiss. Id.
23

In the order to show cause, the Court specifically warned Kohli that “if he fails to

24 properly amend his complaint within 28 days from this order or fails to comply with any
25 court rule or order, the Court may dismiss his case with prejudice.” Id. at 10. The Court
26 ordered Kohli to amend his complaint within 28 days of the January 28, 2014 order. Id.
27 Kohli failed to amend his complaint. Therefore, the Court dismisses Kohli’s action with
28 prejudice. See Hernandez v. City of El Monte, 138 F.3d 393, 400 (9th Cir. 1998) (“The
Case No. 13-cv-04305 NC
ORDER DISMISSING WITH
PREJUDICE

1 district court has the inherent power sua sponte to dismiss a case for lack of prosecution.”).
2

The Clerk of Court is ordered to terminate the case.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4

Date: May 13, 2014

5

_________________________
Nathanael M. Cousins
United States Magistrate Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Case No. 13-cv-04305 NC
ORDER DISMISSING WITH
PREJUDICE

2