Chang et al v. City of Pacifica et al

Filing 39

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SHOULD NOT BE ADJUDICATED AS UNOPPOSED: Plaintiff's Show Cause Response not to exceed five pages due by 6/28/2017. Signed by Saundra Brown Armstrong on 6/23/17. (ig, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/23/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 OAKLAND DIVISION 7 8 THOMAS CHANG, CHRISTINE GOIAS, and MATTHEW CHANG, individually and 9 as survivors of, and successors to, decedent ERROL CHANG, 10 Plaintiffs, Case No: C 15-04591-SBA ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SHOULD NOT BE ADJUDICATED AS UNOPPOSED 11 v. 12 CITY OF PACIFICA, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 Defendants Daly City and four of its individual officers (collectively, “Daly City 16 Defendants”) and City of Pacifica and eight of its individual officers (collectively, “Pacifica 17 Defendants”) have filed separate motions for summary judgment. Dkt. 27, 33. Plaintiff’s 18 oppositions to the motions were due by no later than June 16, 2016. See Dkt. 36. To date, 19 no oppositions have been received. Additionally, on June 20, 2017, the Clerk directed 20 Plaintiff’s counsel to file a stipulation or administrative motion seeking leave to file a late 21 brief. To date, no such filing has been received. 22 Accordingly, Plaintiff IS HEREBY ORDERED to show cause why the pending 23 summary judgment motions should not be adjudicated as unopposed. See United States v. 24 Real Property at Incline Village, 47 F.3d 1511, 1520 (9th Cir. 1995) (although a court 25 cannot grant a summary judgment motion merely because it is unopposed, the court may 26 grant an unopposed motion for summary judgment if the movant’s papers are themselves 27 sufficient to support the motion and do not on their face reveal a genuine issue of material 28 fact); accord Martinez v. Stanford, 323 F.3d 1178, 1182 (9th Cir. 2003). Plaintiff shall 1 submit a written response to this Order, not to exceed five pages, by no later than June 28, 2 2017. If no response to this Order is received by the deadline, the Court will presume that 3 the summary judgment motions are unopposed and adjudicate them as such. 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 6/23/2017 ______________________________ SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG Senior United States District Judge 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-

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?