Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-06545/USCOURTS-cand-3_19-cv-06545-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 18:241 Conspiracy Against Citizen Rights

---

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

VINTON FROST,

Plaintiff,

v.

WESTIN HOTELS MANAGEMENT LP, et 

al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 19-cv-06545-WHO 

ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR 

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

I entered an order on December 16, 2020, adopting Magistrate Judge Kandis A. 

Westmore’s Report and Recommendation a month earlier that explained clearly why plaintiff 

Vinton Frost’s allegations are frivolous; they address incidents barred by the statute of limitation. 

But I allowed Frost to file an amended complaint by January 3, 2020 instead of dismissing his 

complaint with prejudice. Dkt. No. 9.

Instead of amending the complaint, since that time Frost has filed a motion to continue, a 

motion to stay, a motion for reconsideration, and a request for extension. Frost initially requested 

an extension to February 3, 2020, which I granted. Dkt. No. 12. He requested an extension to 

March 2, 2020, which I granted. Dkt. No. 14.1 I then extended his deadline to April 6, 2020 and 

warned him that this was the last time. Dkt. No. 16. I again granted him an extension to April 20, 

2020 for the absolute last time. Dkt. No. 18. He asked for another extension, but I denied it, 

 

1 On March 19, 2020, in Vinton Frost v. Office of the United States Attorney General et al., Case 

No. 19-cv-05190-EMC, Judge Edward M. Chen declared Frost a vexatious litigant and directed 

that the “Clerk of this Court shall not file or accept any further complaints filed by or on behalf on 

Mr. Frost alleging any claims against any federal entity or any current or former federal employee, 

including individual current or former federal employees acting in their official or individual 

capacities, unless and until that complaint has first been received by the general duty judge of this 

Court and approved for filing.” [Dkt. No. 55]. On March 23, 2020, Judge Chen denied Frost’s 

motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration. [Dkt. No. 57].

Case 3:19-cv-06545-WHO Document 22 Filed 04/28/20 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

warning him that failure to file an amended complaint by April 20, 2020 will lead to dismissal of 

this case for failure to prosecute. Dkt. No. 20. Instead of filing an amended complaint, on April 

21, 2020, Frost filed a “Notice of Rule 9b Violation” because it appears he takes issue with the 

fact that my previous order did not mention his pending appeal in another case. Dkt. No. 21.

It has been four months since I adopted Magistrate Judge Westmore’s Report & 

Recommendation. The April 20, 2020 deadline has passed and Frost has not filed an amended 

complaint. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to 

prosecute. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 28, 2020

William H. Orrick

United States District Judge

Case 3:19-cv-06545-WHO Document 22 Filed 04/28/20 Page 2 of 2