Vail v. City of Sacramento

Filing 19

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 7/24/2017 ORDERING Plaintiff SHOW CAUSE in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order as to why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution; CONTINUING 16 Motion to Dismis s to 8/25/2017 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DB) before Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes; On or before 8/11/2017; plaintiff shall file a statement of opposition or non-opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss; and Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. (Washington, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TERRENCE VAIL,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:16-cv-2673 DB PS

v.

ORDER

CITY OF SACRAMENTO,

15

Defendant.

16
17

On June 20, 2017, defendant filed a motion to dismiss and noticed that motion for hearing

18

before the undersigned on July 28, 2017.1 (ECF No. 16.) Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c) plaintiff

19

was to file opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendant’s motion “not less than

20

fourteen (14) days preceding the noticed . . . hearing date.” Plaintiff, however, has failed to file a

21

timely opposition or statement of non-opposition.
The failure of a party to comply with the Local Rules or any order of the court “may be

22
23

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

24

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

25

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

26

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

27
28

1

The parties have consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(c)(1). (ECF No. 12.)
1

1
2

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

3

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

4

opportunity to oppose defendant’s 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
8
9
10
11
12
13

this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution;
2. The July 28, 2017 hearing of defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 16) is continued
to Friday, August 25, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., at the United States District Court, 501 I Street,
Sacramento, California, in Courtroom No. 27, before the undersigned;
3. On or before August 11, 2017, plaintiff shall file a statement of opposition or nonopposition to defendant’s motion to dismiss; and
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: July 24, 2017

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

DLB:6
DB/orders/orders.consent/vail2673.osc3.cont

24
25
26
27
28
2