Stowe et al v. LSF9 Master Participation Trust et al

Filing 12

ORDER of dismissal. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 5/16/2016. (pjhlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/16/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7
8

ROBERT B. STOWE, et al.,

Case No. 16-cv-0436-PJH

Plaintiffs,
9
v.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

LSF9 MASTER PARTICIPATION
TRUST, et al.,
Defendants.

13
14
15

On February 10, 2016, Magistrate Judge James issued a report and

16

recommendation finding that plaintiffs’ complaint failed to state a claim and

17

recommending that it be dismissed with leave to amend. See Dkt. 5. On March 7, 2016,

18

Judge Orrick adopted the report and recommendation, dismissed the complaint, and

19

gave plaintiffs 30 days (i.e., until April 6, 2016) to file an amended complaint.

20

The April 6, 2016 deadline has now long passed, and plaintiffs have not filed an

21

amended complaint. The court having considered the five factors set forth in Malone v.

22

United States Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987), and having determined

23

that, notwithstanding the public policy favoring the disposition of actions on their merits,

24

the court’s need to manage its docket and the public interest in the expeditious resolution

25

of the litigation require dismissal of this action. In view of plaintiffs’ lack of response to

26

this court’s prior orders, the court finds there is no appropriate less drastic sanction.

27

Accordingly, in light of plaintiffs’ failure to file an amended complaint in accordance with

28

the court’s order, the case is DISMISSED pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

1
2
3
4
5

41(b).
IT IS SO ORDER
S
RED.
ated: May 16, 2016
1
Da
__
__________
__________
__________
_______
PH
HYLLIS J. H
HAMILTON
Un
nited States District Ju
s
udge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2