Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 20, 2024

Pittman v. Wells Fargo N.A.

Judge
Jeffrey White
Docket
4:23-cv-03699
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Pittman v. Wells Fargo N.A., Judge Jeffrey White dismissed the case with prejudice after Pittman failed to amend his civil-rights complaint.

Who this affects

Randy D. Pittman’s case against Wells Fargo N.A. and the other named defendants was dismissed with prejudice, and the file was closed.

What happened

In Pittman v. Wells Fargo N.A., the court had previously dismissed Randy D. Pittman’s civil-rights complaint because it did not present a claim the court could recognize for relief. The court gave him 28 days to file an amended complaint and warned that the case would be dismissed if he did not do so.

Pittman did not file an amended complaint, ask for more time, or explain why he had not done so. The opinion does not provide further details about the allegations or the proposed claims.

Judge Jeffrey White dismissed the case with prejudice, ordered the Clerk to enter judgment, and directed the Clerk to close the file.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Pittman v. Wells Fargo N.A. · No. 4:23-cv-03699
Judge
Jeffrey White
Date
June 20, 2024

Background

Randy D. Pittman brought a civil-rights complaint against Wells Fargo N.A. and other defendants. On January 29, 2024, the court dismissed the complaint for failure to present a cognizable claim for relief. The court gave Pittman 28 days to file an amended complaint and warned that the case would be dismissed if he did not amend it.

What Happened After the Earlier Dismissal

Pittman did not file an amended complaint. He also did not request an extension of time or show cause—provide a reason—to explain why he had not amended the complaint.

Ruling

The court dismissed the case with prejudice. The opinion cited a Ninth Circuit decision stating that when a complaint is dismissed with permission to amend and the plaintiff does not amend, the district court must take a further action. The court ordered the Clerk to enter judgment and close the file. This order did not address the underlying merits of Pittman’s civil-rights allegations.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.