Angel-Arriaga v. United States of America

Filing 12

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Show Cause Response due by 6/15/2018. Motion Hearing on 8 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss continued from June 7, 2018 to July 5, 2018 at 01:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore. Signed by Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 6/1/2018. (kawlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/1/2018)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

ROSALIO ANGEL-ARRIAGA,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Case No. 18-cv-01716-KAW

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; ORDER
CONTINUING HEARING DATE ON
MOTION TO DISMISS
Re: Dkt. No. 8

12
13

On January 31, 2018, Plaintiff Rosalio Angel-Arriaga filed a small claims case, asserting

14

that her vehicle was damaged when Jose Corona Ceballos struck her vehicle on October 11, 2017.

15

(Compl. ¶¶ 2-3, Dkt. No. 1-1.) On March 20, 2018, Defendant United States of America removed

16

the action, certifying that Mr. Ceballos was acting within the course of his employment with the

17

U.S. Department of Agriculture, and thus "[t]his is an action against a federal employee for actions

18

taken in the scope of his employment." (Not. of Removal ¶ 5, Dkt. No. 1.)

19

On March 30, 2018, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss this case pursuant to Federal Rule

20

of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) based on Plaintiff's failure to file an administrative tort claim prior to

21

filing suit. (Def.'s Mot. at 2, Dkt. No. 9.) Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3, with an additional

22

three days for mailing, Plaintiff's opposition was due on April 16, 2018. To date, Plaintiff has not

23

filed an opposition.

24

Accordingly, by no later than June 15, 2018, the Court orders Plaintiff to (1) file a

25

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

26

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

27

this order to show cause and the opposition should be filed as separate documents. To aid in her

28

compliance with this order, Plaintiff may wish to contact the Federal Pro Bono Project’s Help

1

Desk—a free service for pro se litigants— by calling [phone] to make an appointment to

2

obtain legal assistance from a licensed attorney.

3

Failure to both timely respond to this order to show cause and file a timely opposition may

4

result in the dismissal of this case for failure to prosecute. See Judge Westmore’s General

5

Standing Order ¶ 22 (“The failure of the opposing party to file a memorandum of points and

6

authorities in opposition to any motion shall constitute consent to the granting of the motion”).

7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Should Plaintiff timely file an opposition, Defendants are permitted to file their reply on or
before June 22, 2018.
Additionally, the June 7, 2018 hearing on the motion to dismiss is continued to July 5,
2018 at the U.S. District Court, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, California at 1:30 p.m.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 1, 2018
__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge

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