From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cranford v. County

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Jun 6, 2008
No. CV-06-03081-PHX-NVW (LOA) (D. Ariz. Jun. 6, 2008)

Opinion

No. CV-06-03081-PHX-NVW (LOA).

June 6, 2008


ORDER


Defendants Gan and Noble have filed a Motion to Dismiss (docket #24) pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to prosecute.

NOTICE — WARNING TO PLAINTIFF THIS NOTICE IS REQUIRED TO BE GIVEN TO YOU BY THE COURT

Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108, 1120 n. 14 (9th Cir. 2003).

Defendants' Motion to Dismiss seeks to have your case dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A motion to dismiss will, if granted, end your case.

Additionally, you must comply with the following provisions of Rule 7.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure:

(e) Length of Motions and Memoranda. Unless otherwise permitted by the Court, a motion including its supporting memorandum, and the response including its supporting memorandum, each shall not exceed seventeen (17) pages, exclusive of attachments and any required statement of facts. Unless otherwise permitted by the Court, a reply including its supporting memorandum shall not exceed eleven (11) pages, exclusive of attachments.
. . . .
(i) Briefs or Memoranda of Law; Effect of Non-Compliance. If a motion does not conform in all substantial respects with the requirements of this Local Rule, or if the unrepresented party or counsel does not serve and file the required answering memoranda, or if the unrepresented party or counsel fails to appear at the time and place assigned for oral argument, such non-compliance may be deemed a consent to the denial or granting of the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily.

LRCiv 7.2.

You must timely respond to all motions. The Court may, in its discretion, treat your failure to respond to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss as a consent to the granting of that Motion without further notice, and judgment may be entered dismissing this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 7.2(i) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. See Brydges v. Lewis, 18 F.3d 651 (9th Cir. 1994) ( per curiam).

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff must file a response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss no later than July 8, 2008. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants may file a reply within 15 days after service of Plaintiff's response.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss will be deemed ready for decision without oral argument on the day following the date set for filing a reply unless otherwise ordered by the Court.


Summaries of

Cranford v. County

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Jun 6, 2008
No. CV-06-03081-PHX-NVW (LOA) (D. Ariz. Jun. 6, 2008)
Case details for

Cranford v. County

Case Details

Full title:Kevin Cranford, Plaintiff, v. Maricopa County, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Arizona

Date published: Jun 6, 2008

Citations

No. CV-06-03081-PHX-NVW (LOA) (D. Ariz. Jun. 6, 2008)