This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se, was referred to the undersigned under Local Rule 302(c)(21), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On June 27, 2011, defendant Allstate Insurance Company filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff's fifth amended complaint, and noticed the motion for hearing on August 10, 2011. Dckt. No. 65.
On July 26, 2011, plaintiff filed a request for a twenty day extension of time (to August 15, 2011) to file her opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss. Dckt. No. 69. Plaintiff contends that "she has exercised due diligence but continued serious illness of her family member has prevented her to write an opposition to [the] motion to dismiss." Id. She "further represents that she will file an opposition to the motion to dismiss within the time requested." Id.
In light of plaintiff's representations, her motion for an extension of time, Dckt. No. 69, will be granted, and the hearing and briefing schedule on the motion to dismiss will be continued.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time, Dckt. No. 69, is granted.
2. The hearing on defendant's motion to dismiss, Dckt. No. 65, is continued to September 7, 2011.
3. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition thereto, no later than August 24, 2011.
4. Failure of plaintiff to file an opposition will be deemed a statement of non-opposition to the pending motion, and may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for lack of prosecution and/or for failure to comply with court orders and this court's Local Rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
5. Defendant may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition, if any, on or before August 31, 2011.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw ...