Pitner et al v. Northland Group Inc et al

Filing 32

ORDER by Judge Benjamin H Settle granting 30 Motion for Summary Judgment as to Northland Group, Inc.(TG)

1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

4
5
6

MICHAEL PITNER, et al.,
7

Plaintiffs,

8
9

v.
NORTHLAND GROUP, INC., et al.,

10

CASE NO. C11-5853BHS
ORDER GRANTING
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Defendants.

11
12

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Northland Group, Inc.’s

13

(“Northland”) unopposed motion for summary judgment. Dkt. 30. Northland’s motion

14

seeks dismissal of all of Plaintiffs’ claims alleged against it in the complaint. Id.

15

Plaintiffs have failed to file a response.

16

Rule 7(b)(2) of the Local Rules states that “[i]f a party fails to file papers in

17

opposition to a motion, such failure may be considered by the court as an admission that

18

the motion has merit.” However, in considering a motion for summary judgment, the

19

motion should not be granted simply because there is no opposition, even if the failure to

20

oppose violated a local rule. See Henry v. Gill Indus., 983 F.2d 943, 950 (9th Cir. 1993).

21

Rather, the moving party must demonstrate the absence of genuine issues of material fact,

22

ORDER - 1

1 regardless of whether the party against whom the motion for summary judgment is
2 directed has filed any opposition. See Cristobal v. Siegel, 26 F.3d 1488, 1491 (9th Cir.
3 1994).
4

Here, Northland filed a motion for summary judgment in which it demonstrates

5 the absence of genuine issues of material fact and Plaintiffs have failed to file an
6 opposition. Accordingly, the Court concludes that Northland’s motion for summary
7 judgment should be granted.
8

The Court, having considered the pleadings filed in support of the motion and the

9 remainder of the file, does hereby find and ORDER that Northland’s motion for
10 summary judgment (Dkt. 30) is GRANTED and the claims alleged in Plaintiffs’
11 complaint against Northland are DISMISSED with prejudice.
12

Dated this 9th day of October, 2012.

A

13
14

BENJAMIN H. SETTLE
United States District Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

ORDER - 2