Mendoza v. Zambrano et al

Filing 42

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE to Plaintiff. Show Cause Response and opposition to the motion to dismiss are due by 9/5/2017. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 8/24/2017. (kawlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2017) (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/24/2017: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (sisS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

ANTHONY M. MENDOZA,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

v.

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Re: Dkt. No. 38

AARON ZAMBRANO, et al.,
Defendants.

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 4:16-cv-06455-KAW

12
13

Plaintiff Anthony Mendoza, proceeding pro se, filed this lawsuit alleging wage and hour

14

violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act. On July 12, 2017, Plaintiff filed a second amended

15

complaint, in which he alleges disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

16

(Dkt. No. 36.) On July 26, 2017, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the second amended

17

complaint. (Dkt. No. 38.) Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3, with an additional three days for

18

mailing, Plaintiff’s opposition was due on August 14, 2017. To date, Plaintiff has not filed an

19

opposition.

20

Accordingly, by no later than September 5, 2017, the Court orders Plaintiff to (1) file a

21

response to this order to show cause and explain why his case should not be dismissed for failure

22

to prosecute, and (2) file an opposition to the motion to dismiss. The response to this order to

23

show cause and the opposition should be filed as separate documents. To aid in his compliance

24

with this order, Plaintiff may wish to contact the Federal Pro Bono Project’s Help Desk—a free

25

service for pro se litigants— by calling [phone] to make an appointment to obtain legal

26

assistance from a licensed attorney.

27
28

Failure to timely respond to this order to show cause may result in the dismissal of this
action for failure to prosecute. See Judge Westmore’s General Standing Order ¶ 22 (“The failure

1

of the opposing party to file a memorandum of points and authorities in opposition to any motion

2

shall constitute consent to the granting of the motion”).

3
4
5
6

Should Plaintiff timely file an opposition, Defendants are permitted to file their reply on or
before September 12, 2017. The October 5, 2017 hearing remains on calendar as scheduled.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 24, 2017
__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

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