(PS)Romero et al v. Monterey Financial Services, LLC
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 1/10/2022 ORDERING plaintiffs to 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 5 Motion to Dismiss Hearin g is CONTINUED to 2/18/2022 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DB) before Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes. On or before 2/4/2022, plaintiffs shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendant's motion. Plaintiffs are cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in the recommendation that this case be dismissed. (Huang, H)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MARIE PAMELA ROMERO and
No. 2:21-cv-2236 TLN DB PS
MONTEREY FINANCIAL SERVICES,
Plaintiffs Marie Pamela Romero and Marlito Romero are proceeding in this action pro se.
This matter was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Noticed for hearing before the undersigned on January 14, 2022, is
defendant’s motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 5.) Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c) plaintiffs were to file
an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendant’s motion “not less than fourteen (14)
days preceding the noticed . . . hearing date.” Plaintiffs, however, have failed to file a 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
grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or
within the inherent power of the Court.” Local Rule 110. Any individual representing himself or
herself without an attorney is bound by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules, and
all applicable law. Local Rule 183(a). Failure to comply with applicable rules and law may be
grounds for dismissal or any other sanction appropriate under the Local Rules. Id.
In light of plaintiffs’ pro se status, and in the interests of justice, the court will provide
plaintiffs with an opportunity to show good cause for plaintiffs’ conduct along with a final
opportunity to oppose defendant’s motion.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiffs 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;
2. The January 14, 2022 hearing of defendant’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 5) is
continued to Friday, February 18, 2022, 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 February 4, 2022, plaintiffs shall file an opposition or statement of non-
opposition to defendant’s motion 1; and
4. Plaintiffs are cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in
the recommendation that this case be dismissed.
DATED: January 10, 2022
/s/ DEBORAH BARNES
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Alternatively, if plaintiffs no longer wish to pursue this civil action, plaintiffs may comply with
this order by filing a request for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure.
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?