Nash v. Wachovia Bank et al

Filing 53

ORDER and ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 12/14/16 ORDERING 50 Motion on Judgment CONTINUED to 1/18/2017 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. Plaintiff shall SHOW CAUSE, in writing, by 1/4/2017 why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition tothe pending motion. Plaintiff SHALL file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition thereto, no la ter than 1/4/2017. Defendant may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition, if any, by 1/11/2017. The parties shall file status reports by 4/12/2017. The Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference CONTINUED to 4/26/2017 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan.(Washington, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

MAURICE R. NASH,

12
13
14
15
16
17

No. 2:14-cv-850-MCE-EFB PS

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

WACHOVIA BANK, WELLS FARGO
BANK, EQUIFAX INFORMATION
SYSTEM LLC., and DOES 1-20,
inclusive,
Defendants.

18
19

On November 17, 2016, defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. filed a motion for judgment

20

on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), and noticed the motion for

21

hearing on December 21, 2016. ECF No. 50. Court records reflect that plaintiff has not filed an

22

opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion.

23

Local Rule 230(c) provides that opposition to the granting of a motion, or a statement of

24

non-opposition thereto, must be served upon the moving party, and filed with this court, no later

25

than fourteen days preceding the noticed hearing date or, in this instance, by December 7, 2016.

26

Local Rule 230(c) further provides that “[n]o party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a

27

motion at oral arguments if opposition to the motion has not been timely filed by that party.”

28

Local Rule 183, governing persons appearing in pro se, provides that failure to comply with the
1

1

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules may be grounds for dismissal, judgment by

2

default, or other appropriate sanctions. Local Rule 110 provides that failure to comply with the

3

Local Rules “may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by

4

statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.” See also Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d

5

52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (“Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper ground for

6

dismissal.”). Pro se litigants are bound by the rules of procedure, even though pleadings are

7

liberally construed in their favor. King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987).

8

Accordingly, good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED that:

9

1. The hearing on defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (ECF No. 50) is

10

continued to January 18, 2017.

11

2. Plaintiff shall show cause, in writing, no later than January 4, 2017, why sanctions

12

should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to

13

the pending motion.

14
15

3. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition thereto,
no later than January 4, 2017.

16

4. Failure of to file an opposition to the motion will be deemed a statement of non-

17

opposition thereto, and may result in a recommendation that this this action be dismissed for lack

18

of prosecution and/or for failure to comply with court orders and this court’s Local Rules. See

19

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

20
21
22

5. Defendant may file a reply to plaintiff’s opposition, if any, on or before January 11,
2017.
6. The Status (Pretrial Scheduling) Conference previously set for January 18, 2017, is

23

continued to April 26, 2017. The parties shall file status reports in compliance with the court’s

24

January 6, 2016 order (ECF No. 8) on or before April 12, 2017.

25

DATED: December 14, 2016.

26
27
28
2