Wofford v. Hamilton et al

Filing 49

ORDER. Motions terminated: ( 10 , 14 , 16 ) MOTIONS to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. Reset Deadlines as to ( 18 , 19 ) MOTIONS to Dismiss : Responses due by 10/7/2013; Replies due by 10/14/2013. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong on 9/30/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(ndr, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/30/2013)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6

OAKLAND DIVISION
7
8 JESSICA LYNN WOFFORD,

Plaintiff,

9
10

vs.

Case No: C 13-2467 SBA
ORDER
Docket 10, 14, 16, 18, 19

11 LANCE HAMILTON, et al.,

Defendants.

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

On June 3, 2013, Plaintiff Jessica Lynn Wofford ("Plaintiff"), proceeding pro se,
commenced the instant action. See Compl., Dkt. 1. On July 30, 2013, Plaintiff filed a first
amended complaint ("FAC") against various Defendants1 alleging federal and state law
claims arising out of her arrest on February 16, 2013 following a traffic stop. See FAC,
Dkt. 11.2 On August 21, 2013, Defendants Robert Crone, Krista LeVier, Victoria Adams
(erroneously sued as Victoria Addams), Michael Lunas, Andrew Blum, Stephen Hedstrom,
Arthur Mann and David Herrick filed a motion to dismiss the FAC. Dkt. 16. On that same
date, Defendants Lance Hamilton, Jason Finley, Daniel Flesch, and John Langan also filed

22
23
1

24

The Defendants include, among others, several law enforcement officers and state
court judges.
2

On July 31, 2013, Defendants Joseph Eastham (erroneously sued as Frederick
Eastham) and Jason Ferguson filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. Dkt. 10. On that
26 same date, Defendants Lance Hamilton, Jason Finley, and John Langan filed a motion to
dismiss the complaint. Dkt. 14. However, because Plaintiff filed her FAC within 21 days
27 after serving these Defendants as permitted by Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(1)(A), Defendants' motions to dismiss the complaint are
28 DENIED as MOOT.
25

1

a motion to dismiss the FAC. Dkt. 18. On August 26, 2013, Defendants Joseph Eastham

2

and Jason Ferguson filed a motion to dismiss the FAC. Dkt. 19.

3

Under Civil Local Rule 7-3, any opposition or statement of non-opposition to a

4

motion is due no later than two weeks after the motion was filed. This Court's Standing

5

Orders specifically warn that the "failure of the opposing party to file a memorandum of

6

points and authorities in opposition to any motion shall constitute a consent to the granting

7

of the motion." Civil Standing Orders at 4, Dkt. 2-1. Notwithstanding the requirements of

8

Civil Local Rule 7-3 and this Court's Standing Orders, Plaintiff has filed nothing in

9

response to the motions to dismiss the FAC.

10

The Court warns Plaintiff that the failure to file a response to the motions to dismiss

11

the FAC (Dkt. 16, 18, 19) within seven (7) days from the date this Order is filed will result

12

in the dismissal of this action under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for

13

failure to comply with a Court Order. See Hells Canyon Preservation Council v. U.S.

14

Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (recognizing that a district court may

15

dismiss an action pursuant to Rule 41(b) sua sponte for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute or

16

comply with a court order); Ferdick v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992) (a

17

district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the court).

18

Accordingly,

19

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

20

1.

21
22

The motions to dismiss the complaint are DENIED as MOOT. The October

1, 2013 hearing on the motions to dismiss the complaint is VACATED.
2.

Plaintiff shall file a response to the motions to dismiss the FAC by no later

23

than seven days (7) from the date this Order is filed. Plaintiff's failure to comply with this

24

Order will result in the dismissal of this action under Rule 41(b). The October 8, 2013

25

hearing on the motions to dismiss the FAC is VACATED. In the event Plaintiff timely

26

responds to Defendants' motions to dismiss the FAC, Defendants may file reply briefs by

27

no later than seven (7) days after the date Plaintiff's responses are due. Upon the expiration

28

of the briefing schedule, the Court will take the matter under submission.
-2-

1

3.

2
3

This Order terminates Docket 10 and Docket 14.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG
United States District Judge

9/30/2013

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-