Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Roy E. Cunningham; et al v. Rbc Mortgage Co.; et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 3, 2012

ROY E. CUNNINGHAM; ET AL., PLAINTIFF,
v.
RBC MORTGAGE CO.; ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

ORDER

The court's order dismissing plaintiffs' complaint without prejudice and directing plaintiffs to file an amended complaint within twenty-one (21) days of its entry was entered on March 28, 2012. (ECF 20.) Plaintiffs have not filed an amended complaint, nor have they filed a request for an extension of time to do so.

Accordingly, the court considers this case to have been abandoned. "[A] federal district court has the inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to prosecute . . . ." Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 49 (1991). Local Rule 110 states: "Failure of counsel or a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court."

This case is hereby dismissed with prejudice. The clerk of the court is directed to CLOSE this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120503

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.