Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. v. Alyson Reeves et al

Filing 23

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER DISMISSING ACTION 20 by Judge Stephen V. Wilson: Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a complete and final Motion for Entry of Default Judgment within two days of the date that this Order is entered on the docket. Failure to file within that time period will result in dismissal of the action with prejudice on account ofPlaintiffs repeated dilatory conduct. 20 , 19 (pj)

Case 2:09-cv-07621-SVW-AJW Document 23

Filed 06/17/10 Page 1 of 3 Page ID #:126

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff's Motion is suitable to a determination without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); Local Rule 7-15. The hearing v. ALYSON REEVES, D/B/A SCAPEGAMING; and DOES 1 through 5 inclusive, Defendants. BLIZZARD ENTERTAINMENT, INC., Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CV 09-7621 SVW (AJWx) ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER DISMISSING ACTION [20] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

[JS-5]

scheduled for June 21, 2010 is VACATED. On March 24, 2010, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause Why This Case Should Not Be Dismissed For Lack of Prosecution. [Docket no. 16.] On April 7, Plaintiff responded by stating that it "has been

Case 2:09-cv-07621-SVW-AJW Document 23

Filed 06/17/10 Page 2 of 3 Page ID #:127

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

diligently preparing a motion for default judgment and entry of a permanent injunction." [Docket no. 17, at 1.] On April 8, the Court vacated its Order to Show Cause and granted Plaintiff thirty days to move for default judgment. [Docket no. 18.] On May 12, the Court dismissed the action because Plaintiff had not filed a motion for default judgment within the allotted time period. [Docket no. 19.] On May 14, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) to Set Aside the Court's May 12 Order Dismissing the Action. [Docket no. 20.] Under Local Rule 7-9, Defendant was required to file her Opposition no later than June 1, 2010. Defendant, who has failed to

appear in this action despite being served with process [see Docket nos. 10, 12], failed to file an Opposition by that deadline and has not subsequently filed an Opposition. Under the Local Rules, "[t]he failure to file any required paper, or the failure to file it within the deadline, may be deemed consent to the granting or denial of the motion." Local Rule 7-12; see also

Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52 (9th Cir. 1995) (affirming trial court's order granting a motion to dismiss on basis of non-opposition under materially identical local rule). Pursuant to Local Rule 7-12, Plaintiff's Motion is GRANTED. Court refrains from addressing the question of whether Plaintiff's attorney's carelessness in calendaring a filing deadline constitutes excusable neglect under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a complete and final Motion for Entry of Default Judgment within two days of the date that this Order is entered on the docket. Failure to file within that time period will The

2

Case 2:09-cv-07621-SVW-AJW Document 23

Filed 06/17/10 Page 3 of 3 Page ID #:128

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

result in dismissal of the action with prejudice on account of Plaintiff's repeated dilatory conduct.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:

June 17, 2010 STEPHEN V. WILSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3