NIXON v. United Parcel Service Inc
ORDER for Response to Motion 11 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by United Parcel Service, Inc. Ordered by Judge Hugh Lawson on 10/3/2013. (nbp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
LARRY THOMAS NIXON,
UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.,
Civil File No. 7:13-CV-38 (HL)
Defendant, United Parcel Service, Inc. filed a motion on October, 3, 2013,
seeking dismissal of this case.
Since Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court
deems it appropriate and necessary to advise him of his obligations in responding to
said Motion and of the consequences which he may suffer if he fails to file a proper
Plaintiff is advised:
(1) that a Motion to Dismiss has been filed herein on behalf of Defendant;
(2) that he has the right to oppose the granting of said Motion; and,
(3) that if he fails to oppose said Motion, the complaint against Defendant
may be dismissed.
Plaintiff is further advised that under the procedures and policies of this Court,
motions to dismiss are normally decided on briefs.
The Court considers the
complaint and briefs filed by the parties in deciding whether dismissal is appropriate
under the law.
Failure of Plaintiff to respond to the Motion to Dismiss may result in the granting
of said Motion.
There would be no trial or any further proceedings as to the
Defendants seeking dismissal.
Accordingly, Plaintiff is directed to file a response to said Motion to Dismiss not
later than October 23, 2013. Thereafter, the Court will consider the Motion and
any opposition to same filed by Plaintiff. If no response is submitted by Plaintiff,
the Court will consider said Motion to be uncontested. The Clerk is directed to
serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff at the last address provided by him.
SO ORDERED, this the 3rd day of October, 2013.
s/ Hugh Lawson
HUGH LAWSON, SENIOR JUDGE
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?