Jones v. Cannedy

Full title: SHERMAN JONES, et al., Plaintiffs, v. C. CANNEDY, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Feb 25, 2011

No. 2:10-cv-2174 KJM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2011)

Opinion

No. 2:10-cv-2174 KJM KJN P.

February 25, 2011

ORDER

KENDALL NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge

On December 21, 2010, defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (failure to state a claim). Plaintiff has not opposed the motion.

Local Rule 230(l) provides in part: "Failure of the responding party to file written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion. . . ." On September 29, 2010, plaintiff was advised of the requirements for filing an opposition to a motion and that failure to oppose such a motion may be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion.

Local Rule 110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules "may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court." In the order filed September 29, 2010, plaintiff was also advised that failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any, to defendants' motion to dismiss. Failure to file an opposition will be deemed as a statement of non-opposition and shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

DATED: February 24, 2011