Carter v. Uber Technologies et al

Filing 43

ORDER DISMISSING CASE.***Civil Case Terminated.*** Signed by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. on 10/13/2017. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/13/2017)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

DARRYL CARTER,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 17-cv-00003-HSG
ORDER DISMISSING CASE

v.
RASIER-CA, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.

12
13

On January 3, 2017, Plaintiff Darryl Carter filed a pro se complaint against Defendants

14

Raiser-CA LLC, and Uber Technologies, Inc. On September 15, 2017, the Court granted

15

Defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be

16

granted. See Dkt. No. 40. The Court instructed Plaintiff that he had until October 6, 2017, to file

17

an amended complaint and cautioned that “[f]ailure to file an amended complaint by this deadline

18

may result in the dismissal of the action without leave to amend.” Id. at 9. Plaintiff failed to file a

19

timely amended complaint. Instead, Plaintiff filed a notice informing the Court that he “does not,

20

at this time, intend to file an amended pleading.” Dkt. No. 41 at 2.

21

The Court interprets Plaintiff’s notice to mean that he cannot allege facts to cure the

22

defects identified in the Court’s previous order. See Dkt. Nos. 40. The Court therefore

23

DISMISSES the case without leave to amend. See Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp., 552

24

F.3d 981, 1007 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[W]here the Plaintiff has previously been granted leave to amend

25

and has subsequently failed to add the requisite particularity to its claims, [t]he district court’s

26

discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly broad.” (quotation omitted)); cf. Edwards v.

27

Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058, 1064 (9th Cir. 2004) (“[A] plaintiff may obtain an appealable

28

final judgment by fil[ing] in writing a notice of intent not to file an amended complaint.”

1

(quotation omitted)).

2

The clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendant and to close the case.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5
6

Dated: 10/13/2017
______________________________________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge

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