Cavazos v. Ambriz
- Eumik.Lee
- 5:23-cv-01815
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Cavazos v. Ambriz, Judge Eumik.Lee dismissed Robert Cavazos’s case without prejudice after he missed the deadline to amend his complaint.
Robert Cavazos’s case was dismissed without prejudice and the file was closed. Any motion to reopen must include an amended complaint meeting the court’s stated requirements.
What happened
In Cavazos v. Ambriz, the court had allowed Robert Cavazos to amend his complaint after granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The deadline passed, but Cavazos did not file an amended complaint or contact the court.
The court dismissed the matter without prejudice because Cavazos did not meet the amendment deadline. The clerk was directed to close the file.
Judge Eumik.Lee stated that any motion to reopen must include an amended complaint with the caption, civil case number, and words “AMENDED COMPLAINT” on its first page.
The detailed version
- Cavazos v. Ambriz · No. 5:23-cv-01815
- Eumik.Lee
- June 20, 2025
Background
On February 24, 2025, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss Robert Cavazos’s complaint, while allowing him to amend it to address deficiencies identified in the dismissal order. The deadline to amend passed, and Cavazos neither filed an amended complaint nor otherwise corresponded with the court.
Ruling
The court dismissed the matter without prejudice for failure to comply with the deadline. “Without prejudice” means the order did not state that the matter was permanently barred from being pursued again. The court also directed the clerk to close the file.
Reopening the Case
The court stated that any motion seeking to reopen the case must be accompanied by an amended complaint. The amended complaint must use the caption and civil case number in this order and must include the words “AMENDED COMPLAINT” on its first page.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.