J & J Sports Productions, Inc. v. Martinez

Filing 48

ORDER Vacating Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment; ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment Should Not be Granted, and Requiring Defendant to submit Written Opposition; ORDER Directing Clerk of the Court to Serve this Order on Defendant, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/7/16. 28-Day Deadline. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC.,

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

No. 1:14-cv-01578-DAD-BAM

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER VACATING HEARING ON
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

MARTIN CARRILLO MARTINEZ,
Defendant.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED,
AND REQUIRING DEFENDANT TO
SUBMIT WRITTEN OPPOSITION
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF THE
COURT TO SERVE THIS ORDER ON
DEFENDANT

20
21
22

On September 19, 2016, plaintiff J & J Sports Productions, Inc. filed a motion for

23

summary judgment on its claim under 47 U.S.C. § 605 and state law claim for conversion. (Doc.

24

No. 43.) On October 17, 2016, defendant Martin Carrillo Martinez, appearing pro se, submitted a

25

letter to the court indicating that he must care for his ill mother in Mexico. (Doc. No. 47.) To

26

date, defendant Martinez has not filed an opposition or statement of non-opposition to plaintiff’s

27

motion. See Local Rule 230(c). In light of defendant’s failure to respond to plaintiff’s motion for

28

summary judgment, this court vacates the hearing on plaintiff’s motion, currently set for
1

1

November 15, 2016. See Local Rule 230(g).
The court hereby orders defendant Martinez to show cause why plaintiff’s motion for

2
3

summary judgment should not be granted. Specifically, the court directs defendant Martinez to

4

file a written response within twenty-eight (28) days of service of this order.1 In his response,

5

defendant Martinez should (1) state why plaintiff’s motion (Doc. No. 43) should not be granted,

6

and (2) include any evidence in support of his position that plaintiff’s motion should not be

7

granted. If defendant fails to comply with this order, the court will deem plaintiff’s motion

8

submitted on the present record and issue an order addressing plaintiff’s motion based solely on

9

the arguments and evidence submitted by plaintiff.

10

Accordingly,

11

1. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve this order, accompanied by a copy of

12

plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 43), on defendant at his address of

13

record;
2. The November 15, 2016, hearing on defendant’s motion for summary judgment is

14
15

vacated; and
3. Defendant Martinez shall file any response to plaintiff’s motion for summary

16
17
18

judgment within twenty-eight (28) days of service of this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

19

Dated:

November 7, 2016
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Plaintiff may, not more than fourteen (14) days after an opposition has been filed, if any, serve
and file a reply to defendant’s opposition to the motion for summary judgment.
2