From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Flores v. Walker

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 23, 2012
Case No. 2:08-CV-01709-KJD-PAL (E.D. Cal. Mar. 23, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 2:08-CV-01709-KJD-PAL

03-23-2012

OMAR FLORES, Plaintiff, v. J. WALKER, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff filed a Motion leave to file an amended complaint (#11), stating that he intended to "seek further clarity of the chronology of the facts" and dismiss certain parties. Plaintiff filed his Second Amended Complaint (#15) on April 23, 2010. On May 6th, 2010 the Court issued an order noting that the Second Amended Complaint was essentially identical to the first and directing Plaintiff to seek leave of the Court if he wished to file another complaint. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or taken any other action in this case for nearly two years. Accordingly, this case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________

Kent J. Dawson

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Flores v. Walker

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 23, 2012
Case No. 2:08-CV-01709-KJD-PAL (E.D. Cal. Mar. 23, 2012)
Case details for

Flores v. Walker

Case Details

Full title:OMAR FLORES, Plaintiff, v. J. WALKER, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Mar 23, 2012

Citations

Case No. 2:08-CV-01709-KJD-PAL (E.D. Cal. Mar. 23, 2012)