Johnson v. Voss et al

Filing 9

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 12/29/2014 ORDERING that the hearing on defendant's 5 motion to quash is CONTINUED to 1/28/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. Pl aintiff shall SHOW CAUSE, in writing, no later than 1/14/2015, why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the pending motion. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion, o r a statement of non-opposition thereto, no later than 1/14/2015. Failure to file an opposition to the motion will be deemed a statement of nonopposition thereto, and may result in a recommendation that this this action be dismissed for lack of prosecution and/or for failure to comply with court orders and this court's Local Rules. Defendant may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition, if any, on or before 1/21/2015. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SCOTT JOHNSON,

12
13
14
15
16
17

No. 2:14-cv-2021-TLN-EFB

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

LOUIS H. VOSS, in his individual and
representative capacity as Trustee-- the
Louis H. Voss Trust; GREEN MAN
RECYCLING, INC., a California
corporation; and Does 1-10,
Defendants.

18
19

On November 18, 2014, defendant Green Man Recycling filed a motion to quash service

20

of the complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(5) on the ground that Green

21

Man Recycling was not properly served. ECF No. 5. Defendant noticed the motion for hearing

22

for January 7, 2015. ECF No. 7.

23

Court records reflect that plaintiff has not filed an opposition or statement of non-

24

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

25

or a statement of non-opposition thereto, must be served upon the moving party, and filed with

26

this court, no later than fourteen days preceding the noticed hearing date or, in this instance, by

27

September 10, 2014. Local Rule 230(c) further provides that “[n]o party will be entitled to be

28

heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if opposition to the motion has not been timely
1

1

filed by that party.” Local Rule 110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be

2

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

3

within the inherent power of the Court.” See also Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir.

4

1995) (“Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper ground for dismissal.”).

5

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

6

1. The hearing on defendant’s motion to quash, ECF No. 5, is continued to January 28,

7

2015.

8
9
10

2. Plaintiff shall show cause, in writing, no later than January 14, 2015, why sanctions
should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to
the pending motion.

11
12

3. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition thereto,
no later than January 14, 2015.

13

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

14

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

15

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

16

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

17

5. Defendant may file a reply to plaintiff’s opposition, if any, on or before January 21,

18

2015.

19

DATED: December 29, 2014.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2