Pasechnik v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al

Filing 11

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 7/29/2010 ORDERING 7 , 10 Motions Hearing CONTINUED to 9/15/2010 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 26 (KJM) before Magistrate Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Pltf shall file opposition, if any no later than 9/1/2010. (Reader, L)

(PS) Pasechnik v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al

Doc. 11

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 vs. WELLS FARGO, et al., Defendants. / This action was referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21). Calendared for hearing on August 4, 2010 are defendants' motions to dismiss. No opposition to the motions has been filed. Local Rule 78-230(c) provides that opposition to the granting of a motion must be filed fourteen days preceding the noticed hearing date. The Rule further provides that "[n]o party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if written opposition to the motion has not been timely filed by that party." In addition, Local Rule 78-230(i) provides that failure to appear may be deemed withdrawal of opposition to the motion or may result in sanctions. Finally, Local Rule 11-110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules "may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court." 1
Dockets.Justia.com

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA YURIY PASECHNIK, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-10-1144 MCE KJM PS

ORDER

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
006 pasechnik.nop

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The hearing date of August 4, 2010 is vacated. Hearing on defendants' motions is continued to September 15, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. in courtroom no. 26. 2. Plaintiff shall file opposition, if any, to the motions no later than September 1, 2010. Failure to file opposition and appear at the hearing will be deemed as a statement of nonopposition and shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). DATED: July 29, 2010.

2