Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01642/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01642-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RHEANNA KENNEDY,

Plaintiff,

v.

SONOMA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, 

et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-01642-KAW 

ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR 

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

Pro se plaintiff Rheanna Kennedy commenced this action on April 10, 2015.1 Several of 

the defendants to this case have moved to dismiss the operative complaint. The motions were 

filed on December 21, 2015, January 12, 2016, January 19, 2016, and February 2, 2016. (Dkt. 

Nos. 26, 32, 38, 48.) So that the remaining defendants could be served and have an opportunity to 

appear, the Court continued the hearing on the motions to June 16, 2016. (Dkt. No. 61.) The 

notice resetting the hearing date stated, "[r]egardless of whether the Court reschedules the hearing 

date, all opposition and reply papers shall be timely filed pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-7(d)." (Id.)

Because Plaintiff had not filed an opposition to any of the motions to dismiss, a statement 

of non-opposition to the motions, or any other document indicating her intent to prosecute this 

case, the Court issued an order to show cause on May 17, 2016. (Dkt. No. 62.) In the order, 

Plaintiff was instructed to, by no later than June 3, 2016, show cause why this case should not be 

dismissed for failure to prosecute, and file (1) either an opposition to each motion to dismiss or a 

statement of non-opposition to each motion to dismiss and (2) a written a response to the order to 

show cause. (Id.) The response to the order to show cause and the opposition (or non-opposition) 

 

1 On July 30, 2015, Plaintiff consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

636(c). Dkt. No. 8.

Case 4:15-cv-01642-KAW Document 63 Filed 06/29/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

to the motions to dismiss were to be filed as separate documents. (Id.) Plaintiff was warned that 

failure to timely file both documents could result in the dismissal of this action for failure to 

prosecute.

As of the filing of this order, Plaintiff has not filed a response to the Court's order to show 

cause or any response to the pending motions to dismiss. Accordingly, this action is dismissed 

without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 06/29/16

__________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:15-cv-01642-KAW Document 63 Filed 06/29/16 Page 2 of 2