Williams v. Perez et al

Filing 60

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE to Plaintiff. Show Cause Response due by 9/18/2017. Plaintiff must also file her opposition by 9/18/2017. Defendants' replies are due by 9/25/2017. ORDER CONTINUING HEARING on 45 , 48 Motions to Dismiss to 11/2/2017 11:0 0 AM in Courtroom 4, 3rd Floor, Oakland before Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore. Initial Case Management Conference continued to 12/5/2017 01:30 PM. Case Management Statement due by 11/28/2017. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 8/31/2017. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/31/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 BRANDON TYANN WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 v. HECTOR PEREZ, et al., Defendants. Case No. 4:16-cv-04143-KAW SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE TO PLAINTIFF; ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT; ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE Re: Dkt. Nos. 45, 48, 56 On July 5, 2017, Defendants Theresa Muley and Linda Uribe (“Federal Defendants”) filed 14 a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Brandon Williams’s second amended complaint. (Dkt. No. 45.) On 15 July 7, 2017, Richmond Housing Authority filed a motion to dismiss. (Dkt. No. 48.) Ms. 16 Williams’s oppositions were due on July 19 and July 21, 2017. On July 26, 2017, the Federal 17 Defendants notified the undersigned that they had been in communication with Ms. Williams, and 18 that she said that she needed additional time to file her opposition, and that they did not object to 19 adjusting the briefing schedule or hearing date to accommodate her. On August 2, 2017, the Court 20 extended Plaintiff’s deadline to serve her oppositions to August 16, 2017. (Dkt. No. 56.) In 21 extending the briefing schedule, Plaintiff was advised that the failure to timely oppose a motion 22 may result in the granting of the motion as unopposed and the dismissal of the case. Id. at 2. To 23 date, Ms. Williams has not filed either opposition nor has she filed any documents with the Court. 24 Accordingly, the Court again continues the hearing date on the motions to dismiss to 25 November 2, 2017 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 4. The Court further orders Plaintiff to SHOW 26 CAUSE by September 18, 2017, why she did not timely file her oppositions to the motions to 27 dismiss, and why her case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Also by September 18, 28 2017, Plaintiff shall file her oppositions to both motions, which shall be done in separate 1 documents. Defendants’ replies shall be filed on or before September 25, 2017. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to timely respond to the second order to show cause 2 3 and the motions to dismiss will result in the lawsuit being dismissed without prejudice for failure 4 to prosecute. 5 In opposing the motions to dismiss and in responding to this order to show cause, Plaintiff 6 may wish to make an appointment with the Federal Pro Bono Project’s Help Desk—a free service 7 for pro se litigants—by calling (415) 782-8982. While the Help Desk does not provide legal 8 representation, Plaintiff may benefit from the assistance of a licensed attorney, and appointments 9 are available at the Oakland Courthouse. Lastly, the case management conference scheduled for October 17, 2017 is continued to 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 December 5, 2017 at 1:30 PM. The parties’ case management statements are due on November 28, 12 2017. 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 31, 2017 __________________________________ KANDIS A. WESTMORE United States Magistrate Judge 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?