Storm

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DIMITRI Z. STORM, Case No. 23-cv-00889-AMO (PR) 8 Plaintiff,

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

9 Vv. WITH PREJUDICE 10 GAVIN NEWSOM, et al., ll Defendants. 12 On November 14, 2023, the Court issued an order dismissing Plaintiff Dimitri Z. Storm’s 5 13 || complaint with leave to amend. Dkt. 14. The Court informed Storm that failure to timely file an 14 || amended complaint within twenty-eight days would result in the dismissal of his action with 3 15 || prejudice. See id. Twenty-eight days have passed, and Storm has not filed an amended complaint a 16 || or communicated with the Court in any manner. 3 17 Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 18 Yourish v. California Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983, 989, 992 (9th Cir. 1999) (affirming dismissal of 19 || action with prejudice when plaintiff failed to amend complaint after receiving leave to do so, 20 || because expeditious resolution of…