(PC Marconnett v. Sacramento County Sheriff Department et al

Filing 32

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 4/18/2011 ORDERING that, w/in 21 days, pltf to file either an oppositition or statement of non-opposition to the 29 motion to dismiss. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

VINCENT SCOTT MARCONNETT,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13

No. CIV S-09-3369 JAM EFB P

vs.
SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF
DEPARTMENT, et al.,

14
Defendants.

ORDER

15
/
16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42

18

U.S.C. § 1983. On March 10, 2011, defendants Aragon and Padilla filed a motion to dismiss the

19

complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6)

20

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion.

21

A responding party’s failure “to file written opposition or to file a statement of no

22

opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion and may

23

result in the imposition of sanctions.” L. R. 230(l). Failure to comply with any order or with the

24

Local Rules “may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or

25

Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.” L. R. 110. The court may recommend this

26

action be dismissed with or without prejudice, as appropriate, if plaintiff disobeys an order or the
1

1

Local Rules. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1252 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not

2

abuse discretion in dismissing pro se plaintiff’s complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file

3

an amended complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856

4

F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff’s failure to comply with local

5

rule regarding notice of change of address affirmed);

6

On December 8, 2010, the court advised plaintiff of the requirements for filing an

7

opposition to the motion, that failure to oppose such a motion may be deemed a waiver of

8

opposition to the motion, and that failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a

9

recommendation of dismissal.

10

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that, within twenty-one days of the date of this

11

order, plaintiff shall file either an opposition to the motion to dismiss or a statement of non-

12

opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be

13

dismissed without prejudice.

14

DATED: April 18, 2011.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2