IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 22, 2011
MACK WEST, PLAINTIFF,
RYAN PETTIGREW, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff and all of the defendants who have appeared in this action have consented to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
On October 20, 2011, defendants Pettigrew, Gayson, Ortega. Coyle, Tayson, Brooks, Moore, Fisher, and Broadman filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Plaintiff has not opposed the motion.
Local Rule 230(l) 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 August 19, 2011, 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 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 August 19, 2011, 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 thirty days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any he has, to the motion to dismiss or a statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of these defendants pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.