802 P.2d 1307, 1314 (Utah 1990) (construing § 78-12-29(1/)). Here, Plaintiff knew of the alleged slander on or around August 11, 1992—the date on the letter from CSRB Administrator Robert White to Adams that was copied and sent to Plaintiff’s counsel, in which White suggests that Adams believes that Plaintiff had committed child sex abuse. Plaintiffs complaint was not filed, however, until July 15, 1994. Clearly, the statute of limitations on Plaintiff’s defamation claim had expired before that point. Plaintiffs defamation claim is dismissed with prejudice on that basis. Summary judgment is also appropriate as to Plaintiffs defamation claim because he failed to file an undertaking as required by Utah Code Ann. § 63-30-19. Rippstein v. City of Provo, 929 F.2d 576, 578 (10th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiff cannot avoid this result by
holding that plaintiffs failure to respond to argument warranted dismissal with prejudice holding dismissal with prejudice is appropriate remedy for failure to timely file undertaking holding that proper remedy for failure to exhaust is dismissal of the claim without prejudice holding that absent extraordinary circumstances a failure to comply with the statute requires a dismissal with prejudice holding that because the opposing party could demonstrate no prejudice a failure to file briefs in accordance with court rules did not warrant dismissal