From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. United States

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Sep 20, 2021
21-cv-00820-WHO (N.D. Cal. Sep. 20, 2021)

Opinion

21-cv-00820-WHO

09-20-2021

SMILEY JAMES HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of AMERICA, Defendant.


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING CASE RE: DKT. NOS. 9, 10

William H. Orrick United States District Judge

On May 10, 2021, Magistrate Judge Robert Illman dismissed pro se plaintiff Harris' complaint with leave to amend, explaining in detail why Harris' complaint had to be dismissed for failure to comply with the pleading requirements set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2409a. Harris was given thirty days to amend his complaint and warned that failure to timely file an amended pleading may result in the dismissal of the case with prejudice. Dkt. No. 9.

Harris did not file an amended complaint. On July 6, 2021, Judge Illman issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending that Harris' case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Dkt. No. 10. Harris has not objected to or otherwise responded to the Report and Recommendation.

Having reviewed the record in this case, I agree with Magistrate Judge Illman's Report and Recommendation and adopt it in full. Harris' complaint failed to state a claim and was properly dismissed. Having failed to file an amended complaint or otherwise comply with the Court's deadlines, this case is DISMISSED for failure to prosecute. The Clerk shall close this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Harris v. United States

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Sep 20, 2021
21-cv-00820-WHO (N.D. Cal. Sep. 20, 2021)
Case details for

Harris v. United States

Case Details

Full title:SMILEY JAMES HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of AMERICA, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Sep 20, 2021

Citations

21-cv-00820-WHO (N.D. Cal. Sep. 20, 2021)