Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Citation
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Parent Document
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Jurisdiction
- United States (federal)
- Effective Date
- 2004-01-26
Other Sections in This Document (51)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
- Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc., 356 F.3d 1058 (2004)
Full Text
1,420 chars29 We believe that Yourish (and Ferdik) can be understood as limited to circumstances in which the plaintiff did not, as WMX Technologies recommends, give the court "notice of intent not to file an amended complaint," 104 F.3d at 1135, but instead simply failed to take any action. Yourish and Ferdik both arose when plaintiffs, given the opportunity to amend or be dismissed, did nothing. In that situation, resources continue to be consumed by a case sitting idly on the court's docket. The failure of the plaintiff eventually to respond to the court's ultimatum — either by amending the complaint or by indicating to the court that it will not do so — is properly met with the sanction of a Rule 41(b) dismissal. Where, however, the plaintiff makes an affirmative choice not to amend, and clearly communicates that choice to the court, there has been no disobedience to a court's order to amend; as Yourish itself noted, the plaintiff has the right to stand on the pleading. Yourish, 191 F.3d at 986 n. 4. Hence we understand the Ferdik-Yourish rule to require a threatened Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal to ferment into a Rule 41(b) dismissal only upon a plaintiff's inaction. When the plaintiff timely responds with a formal notice of his intent not to amend, the threatened dismissal merely ripens into a final, appealable judgment. See WMX Technologies, 104 F.3d at 1135. And that is just what should have happened here.