Marin v. The People's Republic of China
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Robert Steven Huie (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed the plaintiff's failure to file a First Amended Complaint by the deadline set in a previous order. The court dismissed the action without prejudice and directed the Clerk to close the case.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Dismissal of the action without prejudice“For the reasons above, the Court DISMISSES this action without prejudice.” | agree with court The court previously granted leave to amend with a specific deadline and warned of dismissal for non-compliance. The plaintiff failed to file the amended complaint or respond. Dismissing the action without prejudice is the standard procedural remedy for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute or comply with court orders regarding amendment. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly applies the procedural rule that failure to comply with a court-ordered deadline to amend a complaint results in dismissal of the action. The citation to Lira v. Herrera supports the court's authority to dismiss the entire action rather than just the complaint. The reasoning is concise but sufficient for a procedural dismissal based on non-compliance.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MEL MARIN, Case No.: 25-cv-1409-RSH-VET 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING ACTION 13 v. 14 THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA dba DONGGUAN AIBOKESI 15 NETWORK TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD 16 dba CIRCOOTER SCOOTER, 17 Defendants. 18 19 On July 18, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis 20 and dismissed his Complaint with leave to amend. ECF No. 6 at 4. The Court set a deadline 21 for Plaintiff to file a First Amended Complaint to no later than July 31, 2025. Id. The Court 22 advised Plaintiff that failure to comply with this deadline would result in the dismissal of 23 his action. Id. To date, Plaintiff has neither filed a First Amended Complaint or otherwise 24 responded to the Court’s Order. See Docket. 25 For the reasons above, the Court DISMISSES this action without prejudice. See Lira 26 v. Herrera, 427 F.3d 1164, 1169 (9th Cir. 2005) (“If a plaintiff does not take advantage of 27 the opportunity to fix his complaint, a district court may convert the dismissal of 28 1 complaint into dismissal of the entire action.”). The Clerk of Court is directed to close 2 || the case. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 1, 2025 Fobut C / , 8 6 Hon. Robert S. Huie United States District Judge 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28