1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 ELIZABETH PADILLA, et al., 10 Case No. 25-cv-07642-RS Plaintiffs, 11 Vv. ORDER OF DISMISSAL

3 WESTERN TRAFFIC CONTROL, INC.,

a Defendant.

15 On October 20, 2025, this Court granted Defendant’s first motion to dismiss and ordered Q 16 || Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint or advise the Court they did not intend to do so by

= 17 || November 10, 2025. Pursuant to Rule 41(b), a district court may dismiss an action where the

18 || plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with a court order, including failure to amend in a timely 19 || manner. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). See also Yourish v. Cal. Amplifier,

, 992 (9th Cir. 20 1999) (Dismissal of an action for failure to amend in a timely manner was affirmed.). Here, 21 Plaintiffs did not amend nor give notice of their intent not to amend. Accordingly, this case is 22 || dismissed with prejudice. 23 24 || ITISSO ORDERED. 25 26 Dated: December 4, 2025 27

> RICHARD SEEBORG 8 Chief United States District Judge