Ramirez et al v. County of El Dorado et al

Filing 47

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/4/2020 VACATING the 2/12/2020 39 Motion for Summary Judgment Hearing and CONTINUING the hearing to 3/25/2020 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (CKD) before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney. P laintiffs shall file an opposition, if any, to the motion no later than 3/11/2020. Reply, if any, shall be filed no later than 3/18/2020. Per 42 Request for Telephonic Appearance, plaintiffs are permitted to appear telephonically at the 3/25/2020 hearing. (Huang, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

WILLIAM RAMIREZ and STACEY
RAMIREZ,
Plaintiffs,

13
14
15

No. 2:18-cv-00632-KJM-CKD PS

ORDER
v.
COUNTY OF EL DORADO, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18

This action was referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21).

19

Calendared for hearing on February 12, 2020 is defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

20

(ECF No. 39.) Plaintiffs did not file an opposition to the motion, nor did they file a statement of

21

non-opposition.

22

Local Rule 230(c) provides that opposition to the granting of a motion must be filed

23

fourteen days preceding the noticed hearing date. The Rule further provides that “[n]o party will

24

be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if opposition to the motion has

25

not been timely filed by that party.” In addition, Local Rule 230(i) provides that failure to appear

26

may be deemed withdrawal of opposition to the motion or may result in sanctions. Finally, Local

27

Rule 110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be grounds for imposition by

28

the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of
1

1

the Court.”

2

The court shall continue the hearing date for this motion to March 25, 2020.

3

Plaintiffs are cautioned that failure to timely file an opposition to the motion for summary

4

judgment will be deemed a statement of non-opposition to the pending motion and may result in a

5

recommendation that this action be dismissed as to the moving defendants. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

6

41(b) (providing for dismissal of actions based on lack of prosecution).

7

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

8

1. The hearing date of February 12, 2020 is vacated. Hearing on defendants’ motion for

9

summary judgment (ECF No. 39) is continued to March 25, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. in courtroom no.

10
11

24.
2. Plaintiffs shall file an opposition, if any, to the motion for summary judgment no later

12

than March 11, 2020. Plaintiffs are cautioned that failure to file an opposition will be deemed a

13

statement of non-opposition and may result in submission of the motion on the papers and a

14

recommendation that this action be dismissed as to the moving defendants pursuant to Federal

15

Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

16

3. Reply, if any, shall be filed no later than March 18, 2020.

17

4. Per their January 27, 2020 request, plaintiffs are permitted to appear telephonically at

18

the March 25, 2020 hearing. Plaintiffs are instructed to use the following to connect to the call:

19

877-848-7030 (phone), 7431521 (access code). Both plaintiffs are expected to appear for the

20

hearing.

21

Dated: February 4, 2020

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25

15 ramirez632.noopp

26
27
28
2