Creer v. City of Vallejo et al

Filing 67

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 1/9/17 ORDERING that Plaintiff show cause in writing within 14 days of the date of this order as to why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. The hearing on 53 Motion to D ismiss, and 54 Motion for Summary Judgment is CONTINUED to 2/17/2017 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DB) before Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes. On or before 2/3/2017, plaintiff shall file statements of opposition or non-opposition to defendants' motions. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LATASHA NICOLE CREER,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:14-cv-1428 JAM DB PS

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

CITY OF VALLEJO, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18
19

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was, therefore, referred to the
undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
On December 15, 2016, defendants noticed a motion to dismiss and a motion for partial

20

summary judgment for hearing before the undersigned on January 13, 2017. (ECF No. 63.)

21

Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c) plaintiff was to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to

22

defendants’ motion “not less than fourteen (14) days preceding the noticed . . . hearing date.”

23

Plaintiff, however, has failed to file a timely opposition or statement of non-opposition.

24

The failure of a party to comply with the Local Rules or any order of the court “may be

25

grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or

26

within the inherent power of the Court.” Local Rule 110. Any individual representing himself or

27

herself without an attorney is bound by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules, and

28

all applicable law. Local Rule 183(a). Failure to comply with applicable rules and law may be
1

1

grounds for dismissal or any other sanction appropriate under the Local Rules. Id.
In light of plaintiff’s pro se status, and in the interests of justice, the court will provide

2
3

plaintiff with an opportunity to show good cause for her conduct along with a final opportunity to

4

oppose defendants’ motions.

5

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

6

1. Plaintiff show cause in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order as to why

7

this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution1;
2. The January 13, 2017 hearing of defendants’ motions (ECF Nos. 53 & 54) is continued

8
9
10

to Friday, February 17, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., at the United States District Court, 501 I Street,
Sacramento, California, in Courtroom No. 27, before the undersigned;

11
12

3. On or before February 3, 2017, plaintiff shall file statements of opposition or nonopposition to defendants’ motions; and

13

4. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in a

14

recommendation that this case be dismissed.

15

Dated: January 9, 2017

16
17
18
19
20
21

DLB:6
DB\orders\orders.pro se\creer1428.osc

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Alternatively, if plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this civil action plaintiff may comply with
this order by filing a request for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure.
2