Martinez v. Alameda County et al

Filing 18

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 03/28/2017. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/28/2017)

1
2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
3
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5
6

HENRY MARTINEZ,

v.

9

ALAMEDA COUNTY and DOES 1–50,

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

Plaintiff,

7
8

No. 15-cv-5342-CRB

Defendants.

/

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

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).

18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 28, 2017
CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1