Harvey v. City of South Lake Tahoe et al

Filing 100

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 1/17/2014 ORDERING the Clerk is directed to serve plaintiff with a copy of 99 Order to Show Cause; the Court's 12/30/2013 order to show cause is MODIFIED as follows: a) 97 Motion to Dismi ss hearing is CONTINUED to 2/26/2014; b) plaintiff shall SHOW CAUSE, in writing, no later than 2/12/2014, why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the pending motion; c) plaintif f shall file an opposition to the motion, or statement of non-opposition thereto, no later than 2/12/2014; d) failure of plaintiff to file an opposition to the motion will be deemed a statement of non-opposition thereto, and may result in a recommend ation that this action be dismissed for lack of prosecution and/or for failure to comply with the court orders and this court's local rules; e) defendants may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition, if any, on or before 2/19/2014. (Waggoner, D)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL THOMAS HARVEY, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:10-cv-1653-KJM-EFB PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER ANDREW EISSINGER, CHARLES DUKE, SHANNON LANEY, and JAKE HERMINGHAUS, 16 Defendants. 17 18 On November 27, 2013, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the fifth amended complaint 19 for failure to state a claim.1 ECF No. 97. Defendants noticed the hearing on that motion for 20 January 8, 2014. Id. Pursuant to this court’s local rules, plaintiff was required to file an 21 opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion by December 26, 2013. See E.D. Cal. 22 L.R. 230(c); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a). 23 Plaintiff failed to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition. Therefore, on 24 December 30, 2013, plaintiff was ordered to show cause, in writing, no later than January 15, 25 2014, why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement 26 of non-opposition to the pending motion. ECF No. 99. The order also continued the hearing on 27 28 1 This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se, is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). 1 1 defendants’ motion to dismiss to January 29, 2014, and ordered plaintiff to file an opposition or 2 statement of non-opposition to the pending motion no later than January 15, 2014. Id. As of the 3 date of this order, plaintiff has not filed an opposition or statement of non-opposition. However, 4 court records reflect that the Clerk of the Court failed to serve plaintiff with the December 30 5 order to show cause. That order shall be served on plaintiff forthwith. Further, plaintiff will be 6 given additional time to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition and to respond to the 7 December 30, 2013 order to show cause. 8 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 9 1. The Clerk is directed to serve plaintiff with a copy of the court’s December 30, 2013 10 11 12 13 order to show cause, ECF No. 99. 2. The court’s December 30, 2013 order to show cause is modified as follows: a. The hearing on defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 97) is continued to February 26, 2014. 14 b. Plaintiff shall show cause, in writing, no later than February 12, 2014, why 15 sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non- 16 opposition to the pending motion. 17 18 19 c. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition thereto, no later than February 12, 2014. d. Failure of plaintiff to file an opposition to the motion will be deemed a 20 statement of non-opposition thereto, and may result in a recommendation that this action be 21 dismissed for lack of prosecution and/or for failure to comply with court orders and this court’s 22 Local Rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 23 e. Defendants may file a reply to plaintiff’s opposition, if any, on or before 24 February 19, 2014. 25 DATED: January 17, 2014. 26 27 28 2

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?