Risher v. Libby, et al.
ORDER Vacating Hearing and Requiring Plaintiff to File Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to Motion to Dismiss 25 within Twenty-One Days, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 10/5/17. (Gonzalez, R)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case No. 1:17-cv-00087-EPG (PC)
Plaintiff, ORDER VACATING HEARING AND
REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE
OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NONOPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS
WITHIN TWENTY-ONE DAYS
DR. EBINOSA, et al.,
Richard Risher ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis
with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which includes state law claims.
On October 4, 2017, defendant Contreras filed a memorandum of points and authorities in
support of motion to dismiss complaint pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6) (ECF No. 29) and a request
for judicial notice (ECF No. 30). On October 5, 2017, defendant Contreras filed a notice of errata
“because the Motion to Dismiss pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6) and supporting documents failed to
include the date and time for the hearing of the motion.” (ECF No. 31).
Because Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se, Local Rule 230(l) applies. “All motions,
except motions to dismiss for lack of prosecution, filed in actions wherein one party is
incarcerated and proceeding in propria persona, shall be submitted upon the record without oral
argument unless otherwise ordered by the Court. Such motions need not be noticed on the motion
calendar. Opposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be served and filed by the
responding party not more than twenty-one (21) days after the date of service of the motion. A
responding party who has no opposition to the granting of the motion shall serve and file a
statement to that effect, specifically designating the motion in question. Failure of the responding
party to file an opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any
opposition to the granting of the motion and may result in the imposition of sanctions. The
moving party may, not more than seven (7) days after the opposition has been filed in CM/ECF,
serve and file a reply to the opposition. All such motions will be deemed submitted when the
time to reply has expired.” Local Rule 230(l).
Accordingly, the Court will vacate the hearing on defendant Contreras’ motion to dismiss
and require Plaintiff to file his opposition (or statement of non-opposition) to defendant
Contreras’ motion to dismiss within twenty-one days of the date of service of this order. The
Court may set a hearing on the motion if it deems one is necessary after reviewing all of the
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The hearing on defendant Contreras’ motion to dismiss, which is currently set for
November 17, 2017, is VACATED; and
2. Within twenty-one days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file an
opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendant Contreras’ motion to
IT IS SO ORDERED.
October 5, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?