Smith v. Shinseki

Filing 8

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. This action is dismissed without prejudice, but without leave to amend. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 10/3/14. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(kas)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MARVA L. SMITH,

CASE NO. 14cv1018-LAB (DHB)

12

Plaintiff,
vs.
SLOAN D. GIBSON, acting Secretary of
Veterans Affairs,

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

13
14
15

Defendant.

16

On August 4, 2014, the Court screened and dismissed the complaint, pursuant to 28

17

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The order of dismissal directed Plaintiff Marva Smith to file an

18

amended complaint by September 1, 2014. That order cautioned Smith that if she failed to

19

amend within the time permitted, the case would be dismissed without leave to amend. On

20

September 5, Smith moved for an extension of time to amend, stating that she had been

21

unable to work on her complaint for less than a week. Although she did not request a

22

particular amount of time, the Court granted an extension until September 29, 2014,

23

cautioning her that if she needed more time, she should file an ex parte motion well in

24

advance of the September 29 deadline and that she must show extraordinarily good cause.

25

On the afternoon of September 29, Plaintiff called chambers, requesting a hearing

26

date for a motion for extension of time to amend. Because hearing dates are not given for

27

ex parte motions, see Standing Order in Civil Cases, ¶ 8 (“All miscellaneous administrative

28

requests and ex parte applications are considered on the papers and may not be set for a

-1-

14cv1018

1

hearing.”), she was told simply to file her motion. Plaintiff has, however, not filed either an

2

amended complaint, nor a request for extension of time, nor anything else.

3

The action is therefore DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, BUT WITHOUT LEAVE

4

TO AMEND, both for failure to obey the Court’s orders, see Civil Local Rule 83.1(a), and for

5

failure to prosecute. See Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629 (1962) (noting federal

6

trial courts’ power to dismiss actions sua sponte for failure to prosecute).

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: October 3, 2014

9
10

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS
United States District Judge

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

14cv1018