The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge
Through this action Plaintiffs, past and present residents of the Oroville Inn located in Oroville, California, seek redress for a litany of state and federal law claims arising out of their residency. Presently before the Court is a Motion by Defendants Walnut Hill Estate Enterprises, LLC, Jonothan Benefield, and Julie Benefield ("Defendants") to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Causes of Action alleged in Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Additionally, Defendants move to strike portions of Plaintiffs' Second, Third, Sixth, Ninth, Thirteenth, Fifteenth, and Sixteenth Causes of Action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Motion to Strike pursuant to Rule 12(f).*fn1 Plaintiffs have failed to timely file an opposition.
Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c), opposition to a motion must be filed not less than fourteen (14) days prior to the date of the hearing. The date of the hearing on the motion was set for June 24, 2010. Fourteen (14) days prior to the hearing was June 10, 2010. No opposition was filed as required. Counsel is cautioned, however, that failing to file a responsive pleading in the future may give rise to the issuance of sanctions.
In light of the fact that no opposition was filed by Plaintiffs, Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike (Docket No. 17) is GRANTED with leave to amend.
Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint not later than twenty (20) days after the date this Memorandum and Order is filed electronically. If no amended complaint is filed within said twenty (20)-day period, without further notice, Plaintiffs' claims will be dismissed without leave to amend.