Young v. Valenzuela

Filing 7

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge William H. Orrick on 11/17/2022. (jmd, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/17/2022)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

Case 3:22-cv-02350-WHO Document 7 Filed 11/17/22 Page 1 of 1

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

KENRY LEE YOUNG,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 22-cv-02350-WHO
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

v.
E. VALENZUELA,
Defendant.

12
13

Plaintiff Kenry Lee Young’s complaint was dismissed with leave to amend. (Dkt.

14

No. 4.) When Young failed timely to file an amended complaint, the Court sua sponte

15

granted an extension but cautioned that failure to meet the extended deadline would result

16

in dismissal of this action. (Dkt. No. 6.) There was no response to the extension Order.

17

Accordingly, this federal civil rights action is DISMISSED (without prejudice) for

18

failing to comply with the Order and for failing to prosecute. See Federal Rule of Civil

19

Procedure 41(b).

20

Because this dismissal is without prejudice, plaintiff may move to reopen. Any

21

such motion must contain an amended complaint (on this Court’s form) that complies in all

22

respects with the order dismissing the original complaint with leave to amend. The words

23

MOTION TO REOPEN must appear on the first page.

24

The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of defendant, and close the file.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

Dated: November 17, 2022

27
28

_________________________
WILLIAM H. ORRICK
United States District Judge