Arocha v. Sauceda et al

Filing 106

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 03/07/14 recommending that the motion to dismiss 103 filed by defendant Rogel be granted. MOTION to DISMISS 103 referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RUDY AROCHA,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:11-cv-2959 LKK KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.

FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

E. SAUCEDA, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18
19

On January 31, 2014, defendant Rogel filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P. 12(b)(6) and 12(b)(1). Plaintiff has not opposed the motion.
Local Rule 230(l) provides in part: “Failure of the responding party to file written

20

opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to

21

the granting of the motion . . . .” On June 11, 2013, plaintiff was advised of the requirements for

22

filing an opposition to a motion to dismiss and that failure to oppose such a motion may be

23

deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion.

24

Accordingly, plaintiff’s failure to oppose should be deemed a waiver of opposition to the

25

granting of the motion. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the motion to dismiss (ECF No.

26

103) filed by defendant Rogel be granted.

27

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge

28

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days
1

1

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

2

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

3

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the

4

objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The

5

parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to

6

appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

7

Dated: March 7, 2014

8
9

Ar2959.mtd(3)

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2