1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 RANDY D. PITTMAN, Case No. 23-cv-03699-JSW 8 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL 9 v. 10 WELLS FARGO N.A., et al., ll Defendants. 12 On January 29, 2024, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's civil rights complaint for failure to 5 13 || present a cognizable claim for relief. (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff was granted 28 days to file an 14 || amended complaint, and warned that if he did not do so the case would be dismissed. He has not 3 15 || filed an amended complaint, requested an extension of time, or shown cause why not. This case is a 16 || accordingly DISMISSED with prejudice. See WMX Technologies v. Miller,

, 1136 3 17 (9th Cir. 1997) (when complaint has been dismissed with leave to amend and plaintiff does not 18 amend, further district court determination is necessary). 19 The Clerk shall enter judgment and close the file. 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 Dated: June 20, 2024 22 / | 23 MJ Yhouy : ‘Hite 24 United state District Fudge 25 26 27 28