Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00877/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-00877-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
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

TAJAI CALIP,

Plaintiff,

v.

OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL 

DISTRICT,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-00877-SI 

ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE 

In an order filed November 2, 2015, the Court dismissed the second amended complaint 

and granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint by November 13, 2015. Dkt. 47. That 

order informed plaintiff that if she failed to file an amended complaint by November 13, 2015, the 

Court would dismiss this case.

Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, and accordingly the Court DISMISSES this 

case without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).1 The Clerk shall close 

the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 17, 2015 ______________________________________

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

 

1

 On November 6 and 12, 2015, plaintiff filed three documents in opposition to 

defendant's October 28, 2015 request for judicial notice. See Dkts. 49-50 (plaintiff's oppositions), 

Dkt. 44 (defendant's request for judicial notice). The Court granted defendant's request for judicial 

notice (of state court pleadings and documents) in the November 2, 2015 order, and thus plaintiff's 

oppositions to the request for judicial notice are untimely. In light of plaintiff's pro se status, the 

Court has reviewed the oppositions, and determines that they cannot be construed, individually or 

collectively, as an amended complaint. 

Case 3:15-cv-00877-SI Document 51 Filed 11/17/15 Page 1 of 1