Bryan Williams v. Jeffrey A. Ostriker

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaApril 29, 20208:20-cv-00209California207 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 8:20-cv-00209-JLS-JDE Date: April 29, 2020 Title: Bryan Williams v. Jeffrey A. Ostriker et al.

Present: HONORABLE JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Terry Guerrero N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:

Not Present Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DISMISSING ENTIRE ACTION

On April 16, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the Court should not decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s Unruh Act claim. (Doc. 15.) In that Order, the Court explicitly stated that “[f]ailure to respond may, without further warning, result in dismissal of the entire action without prejudice.” (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff has not filed a response. As noted in the Court’s prior Order, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) the Court has the inherent power to dismiss an action for a plaintiff’s failure to comply with a court order. See Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-33 (1962); Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.