Om et al v. Melero et al

Filing 43

ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 4/16/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/16/2013)

Download PDF
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 KAMAJI OM, KRSNAYA OM, and SUKLA TARA AUSHADHALAY, No. C 12-5498 CW 5 Plaintiffs, ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 6 v. 7 OFFICER MELERO, et al., 8 Defendants. ________________________________/ 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 On February 27, 2013, the Court issued an order dismissing 11 Plaintiffs’ claims against City Defendants with prejudice. 12 No. 41. 13 to amend their claims against Defendant Vickie Virk and to “show 14 good cause why their claims against Virk should not be dismissed 15 for failure to complete timely service as required by Federal Rule 16 of Civil Procedure 4(m).” 17 Plaintiffs that “failure to comply with the instructions in this 18 order may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to 19 prosecute.” 20 Docket In that order, the Court gave Plaintiffs twenty-one days Id. at 10. The Court also warned Id. at 10-11. Because Plaintiffs have failed to file an amended complaint 21 and have not shown good cause why their claims against Virk should 22 survive, the Court hereby DISMISSES their claims against Virk with 23 prejudice. 24 the file. 25 The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 27 28 Dated: 4/16/2013 CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge

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?