Williams v. Perez et al
Filing
38
ORDER by Judge Kandis A. Westmore terminating 16 , 27 Motions to Dismiss due to the filing of the 37 second amended complaint; ORDER discharging the 31 5/22/17 order to show cause. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/16/2017)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
BRANDON T. WILLIAMS,
Case No. 4:16-cv-04143-KAW
Plaintiff,
8
ORDER TERMINATING MOTIONS TO
DISMISS; ORDER DISCHARGING
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
v.
9
10
HECTOR PEREZ, et al.,
Re: Dkt. Nos. 16, 27, 31
Defendants.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
On April 1, 2017, Defendant Richmond Housing Authority (“Richmond”) filed a motion to
14
dismiss Plaintiff Brandon Williams’s first amended complaint. (Dkt. No. 16.) On April 17, 2017,
15
Plaintiff filed a motion seeking leave to file an amended complaint. (Dkt. No. 21.) On April 19,
16
2017, Richmond filed a notice of non-opposition, and provided that it would withdraw its motion
17
to dismiss once the second amended complaint was filed. (Dkt. No. 22.)
18
On April 20, 2017, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second amended
19
complaint, and ordered that she file the amended complaint by May 5, 2017, and informed
20
Plaintiff that, upon timely filing, the Court would terminate the pending motion to dismiss. (Dkt.
21
No. 23.) Plaintiff did not timely file her second amended complaint.
22
23
24
On May 12, 2017, the federal defendants filed a motion to dismiss. (Dkt. No. 27.) The
hearing is noticed for July 6, 2017.
On May 22, 2017, the Court issued an order continuing the hearing on the Richmond’s
25
motion to dismiss to July 6, 2017, and ordered Plaintiff to show cause why she did not timely file
26
her second amended complaint, and why her case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
27
(Dkt. No. 31.) Plaintiff was informed that if she responded to the order to show cause and filed
28
her second amended complaint by June 9, 2017, the Court would terminate both pending motions
1
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). See id. On June 9, 2017, Plaintiffs filed
2
an amended complaint and a response to the order to show cause. (Dkt. Nos. 35 & 37.)
3
Accordingly, the Court terminates the pending motions to dismiss, as the operative
4
complaint is now the second amended complaint, and discharges the order to show cause.
5
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 16, 2017
______________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge
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
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?