McDaughtery v. Arce
- Jacquelyn Corley
- 3:25-cv-02474
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In McDaughtery v. Arce, Judge Corley dismissed the case with prejudice after McDaughtery failed to amend his complaint.
Lesester D. McDaughtery’s case against Carlos Arce was dismissed with prejudice and closed. The opinion does not describe any further effect on either party.
What happened
In Lesester D. McDaughtery v. Carlos Arce, the court had previously dismissed McDaughtery’s civil-rights complaint because it did not present a valid claim 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.
McDaughtery did not file an amended complaint, ask for more time, or explain why he had not done so. The court therefore dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning this case was closed and the dismissal bars refiling the same claims in this action.
Judge Jacquelyn Corley ordered the clerk to enter judgment and close the file.
The detailed version
- McDaughtery v. Arce · No. 3:25-cv-02474
- Jacquelyn Corley
- July 24, 2025
Background
The court had dismissed McDaughtery’s civil-rights complaint on April 23, 2025, for failure to present a legally cognizable claim for relief. The court allowed 28 days to file an amended complaint and warned that the case would be dismissed if he did not amend.
Ruling
McDaughtery did not file an amended complaint, request an extension of time, or show cause—provide a reason—why he had not done so. The court dismissed the case with prejudice. It ordered the clerk to enter judgment and close the file.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.