Opinion
Civil Action No. 05-2443-KHV.
October 12, 2006
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' Claims And Supporting Memorandum Of Law (Doc. #23) filed August 29, 2006. Pursuant to D. Kan. Rule 6.1(d)(2), plaintiffs had until September 21, 2006 to file a response to defendant's motion to dismiss. To date, plaintiffs have not responded. Pursuant to D. Kan. Rule 7.4, "[i]f a respondent fails to file a response within the time required by Rule 6.1(d), the motion will be considered and decided as an uncontested motion, and ordinarily will be granted without further notice." For this reason and substantially the reasons set forth in Defendant's Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' Claims And Supporting Memorandum Of Law (Doc. #23) filed August 29, 2006 and the Notice And Order To Show Cause (Doc. #28) filed September 28, 2006, the Court sustains defendants' motion. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant's Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' Claims And Supporting Memorandum Of Law (Doc. #23) filed August 29, 2006 be and hereby is SUSTAINED. Plaintiffs' claims are dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with discovery and for lack of prosecution.
On September 28, 2006, Magistrate Judge James P. O'Hara ordered plaintiffs to show cause in writing on or before October 9, 2006 why this case should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to comply with discovery, failure to respond to defendant's motion to dismiss and for lack of prosecution under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). To date, plaintiffs have not responded to the show cause order.