Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Tyler Farmer v. Labor Ready Southwest

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 14, 2012

TYLER FARMER,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
LABOR READY SOUTHWEST, INC., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: M. James Lorenz United States District Court Judge

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND TO STATE COURT [DOC. 7]

Defendants Labor Ready Southwest, Inc., Trueblue, Inc., and True Blue Enterprises, Inc. Swift Transportation Corporation removed this action from the San Diego Superior Court. On January 27, 2012, Plaintiff Tyler Farmer filed a motion to remand this action back to state court. (Doc. 7.) The Court also issued an order finding Plaintiff's motion suitable for determination on the papers submitted and without oral argument. (Doc. 8.) Defendants have not opposed.

The Ninth Circuit has held that pursuant to a local rule, a district court may properly grant a motion for failure to respond. See generally Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 52 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal for failure to file timely opposition papers where plaintiff had notice of the motion and ample time to respond). Civil Local Rule 7.1(f.3.c) expressly provides that "[i]f an opposing party fails to file papers in the manner required by Local Rule 7.1.e.2, that failure may constitute a consent to the granting of that motion or other ruling by the court."

In this case, based on the February 27, 2012 hearing date, Defendants' opposition was due by February 13, 2012. However, Defendants did not file an opposition by that date and have not requested additional time to do so. Moreover, there is no evidence before the Court that Plaintiff's moving papers failed to reach the mailing address designated in his Proof of Service or that Defendants are not aware of the pending motion. Therefore, relying on Civil Local Rule 7.1(f.3.c), the Court deems Defendants' failure to oppose Plaintiff's motion as consent to granting it.

In light of the foregoing, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion and hereby REMANDS this matter to the San Diego Superior Court. The Clerk of the Court shall mail a certified copy this order to the state court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120214

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.