Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03156/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03156-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Vance S. Elliott
Plaintiff
Telerico
Defendant

Document Text:

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 

VANCE S. ELLIOTT,

Plaintiff,

v.

TELERICO,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-03156-WHO 

ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

On July 8, 2015, I issued an order granting plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 

pauperis and dismissing his complaint for failure to state a claim. Dkt. No. 3. I gave him until 

August 7, 2015 to file an amended complaint. Id. 

Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint by August 7, 2015 or at any time thereafter. 

On August 12, 2015, I ordered him to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for 

failure to prosecute. Dkt. No. 4. I gave plaintiff until September 1, 2015 either to file a statement 

showing cause why the case should not be dismissed, or to submit an amended complaint curing 

the deficiencies identified in the July 8, 2015 order dismissing his original complaint. Id.

As of the date of this order, plaintiff has not filed any response. Accordingly, this case is 

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 

F.3d 639, 642-43 (9th Cir. 2002) (discussing factors relevant to whether to dismiss a case for 

failure to prosecute or to comply with a court order); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th 

Cir. 1992), (“Although it is preferred, it is not required that the district court make explicit 

findings in order to show that it has considered these factors.”). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 15, 2015 

______________________________________ 

WILLIAM H. ORRICK 

United States District Judge 

Case 3:15-cv-03156-WHO Document 5 Filed 09/15/15 Page 1 of 1