Aleksandr Davydov v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Robert Steven Huie (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed the docket to determine if the plaintiff had filed an 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 because the plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint or respond to the court's order.
| 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 that failure to comply would result in dismissal. The plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint or respond by the deadline. Dismissing the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute or comply with a court order is a standard and appropriate exercise of the court's inherent authority to manage its docket. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly applies the Ninth Circuit precedent cited to support the dismissal of the entire action rather than just the complaint, based on the plaintiff's failure to comply with the court's deadline to amend.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALEKSANDR DAVYDOV, Case No.: 3:25-cv-0970-RSH-SBC 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING CASE 13 v. 14 15 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, 16 17 Defendant. 18 19 20 On August 15, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma 21 pauperis and dismissed his Complaint with leave to amend. ECF No. 6. The Court set a 22 deadline for Plaintiff to file an Amended Complaint to no later than October 14, 2025. Id. 23 at 10–11. The Court advised Plaintiff that failure to comply with this deadline would result 24 in the dismissal of his action. Id. 25 To date, Plaintiff has neither filed a First Amended Complaint or otherwise 26 responded to the Court’s Order. See Docket. For the reasons above, the Court DISMISSES 27 this action without prejudice. See Lira v. Herrera, 427 F.3d 1164, 1169 (9th Cir. 2005) (“If 28 a plaintiff does not take advantage of the opportunity to fix his complaint, a district court 1 convert the dismissal of the complaint into dismissal of the entire action.”). The Clerk 2 || of Court is directed to close the case. 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 || Dated: October 16, 2025 ‘ 6 Hon. Robert S. Hute 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 2