Williams v. Diaz
- Yvonne Rogers
- 4:22-cv-06511
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Williams v. Diaz, Judge Rogers dismissed the complaint without prejudice because Williams did not file an amended complaint by the deadline.
Brian Williams’s action against Ralph Diaz and the other named defendants was dismissed without prejudice, the pending motions were terminated, and the case was closed.
What happened
Williams v. Diaz was a civil-rights case brought by Brian Williams against Ralph Diaz and other defendants. The court had given Williams 28 days to file an amended complaint alleging enough facts to state a constitutional claim.
Williams did not file an amended complaint within that time. The court had warned that failing to do so could lead to dismissal for failing to move the case forward.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers dismissed the complaint without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), terminated pending motions, and closed the case. The order stated that Williams may file a new civil-rights action if he is prepared to pursue his claims.
The detailed version
- Williams v. Diaz · No. 4:22-cv-06511
- Yvonne Rogers
- July 10, 2023
Background
On May 15, 2023, the court dismissed Williams’s original complaint but gave him permission to amend it. The court allowed 28 days for Williams to file an amended complaint containing facts sufficient to state a constitutional claim. It warned that failing to file on time could result in dismissal for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward.
The deadline passed, and Williams did not file an amended complaint.
Ruling
The court applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which allows dismissal when a plaintiff fails to prosecute an action or comply with a court order. After considering the factors identified in the cited Ninth Circuit decisions, the court found that dismissal was warranted.
The court ordered that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice. It also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate all pending motions and close the file.
Effect of the Order
The order stated that, if Williams is prepared to pursue his claims, he may file a new civil-rights action. The opinion did not decide whether Williams’s alleged constitutional claims were legally valid or whether the defendants were liable.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.