IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 12, 2008
JOAQUIN N'GE WRIGHT, PLAINTIFF,
J. LIZARRAGA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
On March 14, 2008, defendant Anguzza filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff had not opposed the motion, so on April 30, 2008, the court issued an order to show cause requiring plaintiff to file an opposition, if any, to defendant's motion to dismiss. In response to the order, plaintiff filed a request for a sixty-day extension of time. The court granted plaintiff's extension of time. However, that time has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed an opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss.*fn1
As the court previously advised plaintiff, Local Rule 78-230(m) provides in part: "Failure of the responding party to file written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion . . . ." On January 10, 2008, plaintiff was advised of the requirements for filing an opposition to the motion and that failure to oppose such a motion may be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion.
Local Rule 11-110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules "may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court." In the order filed January 10, 2008, plaintiff was advised that failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed.
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within fifteen days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any, to defendant's motion to dismiss. Failure to file an opposition will be deemed as a statement of non-opposition and shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).