From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Patterson v. Franklin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 3, 2012
Case No.: 11-CV-06137 YGR (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3, 2012)

Opinion

Case No.: 11-CV-06137 YGR

08-03-2012

ANDRE PATTERSON, Plaintiff, v. RACHIALLE FRANKLIN, Defendant.


ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

On December 15, 2011, Plaintiff's complaint was dismissed and his application to proceed in forma pauperis was denied. Plaintiff was advised that if Plaintiff wished to pursue this action, he must file an amended complaint and a renewed application to proceed in forma pauperis by January 3, 2012. Plaintiff was warned that failure to file a cognizable legal claim by this date would result in dismissal of this action. To date Plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint or renewed application to proceed in forma pauperis.

Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute.

The Case Management Conference set for August 6, 2012 is VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

____________________________

YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE


Summaries of

Patterson v. Franklin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 3, 2012
Case No.: 11-CV-06137 YGR (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3, 2012)
Case details for

Patterson v. Franklin

Case Details

Full title:ANDRE PATTERSON, Plaintiff, v. RACHIALLE FRANKLIN, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Aug 3, 2012

Citations

Case No.: 11-CV-06137 YGR (N.D. Cal. Aug. 3, 2012)

Citing Cases

Patterson v. Goncalves

Accordingly, the Court dismissed Patterson's complaint with prejudice. Id. (3) Patterson v. Franklin, No.…