# Woods v. City of St. Louis, Missouri

> District Court, E.D. Missouri · September 18, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11140737

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. Missouri
- **Decided:** September 18, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11140737

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

DEBORAH WOODS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) Case No. 4:24-cv-00868-MTS
)
CITY OF ST. LOUIS, et al., )
)
Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION
On July 25, 2025, the Court determined that Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, Doc.
[40], was subject to dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Procedure 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(e)(2)(ii). The Court gave forty-five days in which to file a Second Amended
Complaint that, addressing the deficiencies raised in the Memorandum and Order, would
“sufficiently state a claim for relief.” Doc. [53] at 13. The Court warned Plaintiff that
failure to comply “may result in dismissal of this action without further notice.” Id.
Plaintiff’s deadline to file an amended complaint was Monday, September 08, 2025, and
she has not sought additional time in which to comply.
Because the Court gave Plaintiff meaningful notice of what was expected, cautioned
her regarding the consequences of her failure to comply, and gave her a reasonable amount
of time in which to do so, the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice due to
Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this Court’s Order to amend her complaint and for her
failure to prosecute this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d
801, 803-04 (8th Cir. 1986) (a district court has the power to dismiss an action for the
plaintiff's failure to comply with any court order); Dudley v. Miles, 597 F. App’x 392 (8th
Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal without prejudice where self-represented
plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint despite being cautioned that dismissal could
result from failure to do so). The Court will enter a separate Order of Dismissal herewith.
Dated this 18th day of September 2025.
{uy T. SCHELP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11140737. Public record. Not legal advice.