UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 11, 2012
CITY OF GLENDALE (CA), ET AL.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Present: The Honorable Jay C. Gandhi, United States Magistrate Judge
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Beatriz Martinez None Appearing Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendants: None Appearing None Appearing Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO FILE OPPOSITIONS TO MOTIONS TO DISMISS
On June 1, 2011 and July 5, 2012, defendants County of Los Angeles, Kathryn Albracht, City of Glendale, and Ashraf Mankarios filed and served two Motions to Dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). [See Docket Nos. 13, 15.] The Court gave Plaintiff until September 7, 2012 to file Oppositions or Notices of Non-Opposition to both Motions. (Aug. 10, 2012 Ord. at 1.)
To date, Plaintiff has not filed any Oppositions. The failure to file an Opposition within the deadline set by the Court may be deemed Plaintiff's consent to granting a Motion to Dismiss. L.R. 7-12.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT on or before September 25, 2012, Plaintiff shall file a Response to this Order showing good cause, if any exists, why she failed to timely file Oppositions to Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, and why Defendants should not be dismissed based on Plaintiff's failure to file Oppositions. See L.R. 7-12; Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53-54 (9th Cir.1995) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal of
prisoner's action for failure to file opposition to motion to dismiss); see also Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 643 (9th Cir. 2002) (affirming dismissal of habeas petition with prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court's order).
Plaintiff shall support any attempt to show good cause with a declaration under penalty of perjury, accompanied by Oppositions that (a) state whether Plaintiff admits or denies each allegation of fact contained in the Motions to Dismiss; and (b) is limited to facts or contentions responsive to matters raised in the Motions to Dismiss.
The Court admonishes Plaintiff that her failure to timely file a declaration responsive to this Order to Show Cause will be deemed by the Court as further evidence of her failure to comply with the Court's orders and rules, and her consent to the granting of Defendants' Motions, and will result in a recommendation to the District Judge that Defendants be dismissed on that basis.
cc: Parties of Record
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.