Bonillas v. United Airlines, Inc.

Filing 198

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE A RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR DE NOVO DETERMINATION OF DISPOSITIVE MATTER REFERRED TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong on 4/2/2015. (mklS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/2/2015)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3

OAKLAND DIVISION

4
5 RAUL BONILLAS, an individual,

Plaintiff,

6

vs.

7

8 UNITED AIR LINES, INC., and DOES 1

through 10, inclusive,
9

Case No: C 12-6574 SBA
ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF
TO FILE A RESPONSE TO
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR DE
NOVO DETERMINATION OF
DISPOSITIVE MATTER
REFERRED TO MAGISTRATE
JUDGE

Defendants.
Dkt. 193

10
11

On August 19, 2014, the Court granted Defendant’s motion for summary judgment

12

and entered judgment accordingly. Dkt. 145, 146. Defendant then filed a motion for

13

attorney’s fees, which the Court referred to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte (“the

14

Magistrate”) for a report and recommendation, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and

15

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Dkt. 149, 151. On February 18, 2015, the Magistrate issued her

16

report and recommendation, recommending that the Court deny Defendant’s motion. Dkt.

17

191.

18

On March 4, 2015, Defendant timely filed a Motion for De Novo Determination of

19

Dispositive Matter Referred to Magistrate Judge, which is noticed for hearing on April 14,

20

2015. Dkt. 193. Under the Court’s Local Rules, Plaintiff’s response to Defendant’s motion

21

should have been filed by no later than March 18, 2015. Civ. L.R. 7-3(a). To date, no

22

opposition has been filed by Plaintiff. Although Plaintiff’s lack of response may be

23

construed as a consent to the relief sought in Defendant’s motion, the preferable course of

24

action in this instance is to consider the motion on the merits. See Omstead v. Dell, Inc.,

25

594 F.3d 1081, 1084 (9th Cir. 2010). Accordingly,

26

//

27

//

28

//

1

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

2

1.

Plaintiff shall file his opposition, or statement of non-opposition, to

3

Defendant’s Motion for De Novo Determination of Dispositive Matter Referred to

4

Magistrate Judge, by no later than April 9, 2015.

5

2.

Defendant shall file its reply by April 14, 2015.

6

3.

The Court will resolve the motion without a hearing, pursuant to Civil Local

7
8
9

Rule 7-1(b). The motion hearing scheduled for April 14, 2015 is VACATED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 4/2/15

______________________________
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG
United States District Judge

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-