Clark v. County of Sacramento et al
Filing
65
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 10/2/18 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 of 60 the Motion for Summary Judgment is CONTINUED to 11/2/2018 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DB) before Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes. On or before 10/19/18, plaintiff shall file a reply to defendants' motion for summary judgment. (Kastilahn, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
FELICIA CLARK,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:15-cv-1211 JAM DB PS
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was, therefore, referred to the
18
undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On August 21,
19
2018, defendants noticed a motion for summary judgment for hearing before the undersigned on
20
October 5, 2018. (ECF No. 60.) Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c) plaintiff was to file opposition or
21
a statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion “not less than fourteen (14) days preceding
22
the noticed . . . hearing date.” Plaintiff, however, has failed to file a timely opposition or
23
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 plaintiff’s conduct along with a final
4
opportunity to oppose defendants’ motion.
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 October 5, 2018 hearing of defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No.
8
9
10
60) is continued to Friday, November 2, 2018, 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 October 19, 2018, plaintiff shall file a statement of opposition or nonopposition to defendants’ motion for summary judgment; 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: October 2, 2018
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
DLB:6
DB\orders\orders.pro se\clark1211.osc.cont.hrg
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
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?