Dixie v. Virga et al
Filing
48
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/4/14 ORDERING that the courts February 21, 2014 order to show cause 44 is DISCHARGED. Within 21 days of this order, defendants shall file an opposition to plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction 37 . Plaintiff may file a reply, if any, within seven days after defendants file their opposition.(Dillon, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JAMES LEWIS DIXIE,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 2:12-cv-2626 LKK DAD
v.
ORDER
TIM VIRGA, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42
17
18
U.S.C. § 1983. On December 12, 2013, plaintiff filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction. (ECF
19
No. 37.) Defendants did not file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to that motion. On
20
February 21, 2014, the court issued an order directing defendants to show cause for why they did
21
not file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to plaintiff’s motion within the twenty-one
22
day period provided under Local Rule 230(l). (ECF No. 44.) Defendants have timely filed a
23
response to the court’s order. (ECF No. 45.) In their response, defendants state that they did not
24
file an opposition to the motion for preliminary injunction pursuant to Local Rule 230(l) because
25
they believed that they were excused from doing so by a previous court order issued on February
26
6, 2013 directing service by the United States Marshall (ECF No. 16). Defendants specifically
27
rely on the following language from that order:
28
/////
1
1
Unless otherwise ordered, all motions to dismiss, motions for
summary judgment, motions concerning discovery, motions
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7, 11, 12, 15, 41, 55, 56, 59 and 60, and
E.D. Cal. R. 110, shall be briefed pursuant to L.R. 230(l). Failure
to timely oppose such a motion may be deemed a waiver of
opposition to the motion. See L.R. 230(l). Opposition to all other
motions need be filed only as directed by the court.
2
3
4
5
(ECF No. 16 at 3 (emphasis added).)
6
The court finds that defendants reasonably relied on this language in not filing an
7
opposition to plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction within the time set out in Local Rule
8
230(l). Accordingly, good cause appearing, the court’s order to show cause (ECF No. 44) is
9
discharged. Pursuant to its February 6, 2013 order, the court directs defendants to file an
10
opposition to plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 37) within twenty-one days
11
of this order. Plaintiff shall file a reply, if any, within seven days after defendants file their
12
opposition.
13
For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
14
1. The court’s February 21, 2014 order to show cause (ECF No. 44) is DISCHARGED.
15
2. Within twenty-one days of this order, defendants shall file an opposition to plaintiff’s
16
17
Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 37).
1. Plaintiff may file a reply, if any, within seven days after defendants file their
18
opposition.
19
Dated: March 4, 2014
20
21
dixi2626.oscdischarge.docx
22
23
24
25
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?