Washington v. Brown

Full title: JESSE WASHINGTON, Plaintiff, v. J. BROWN, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Nov 9, 2010

No. CIV S-06-1994 WBS DAD P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 9, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-1994 WBS DAD P.

November 9, 2010

ORDER

DALE DROZD, Magistrate Judge

On October 11, 2010, defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). Plaintiff has not opposed the motion.

Local Rule 230(1) 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 July 15, 2009, plaintiff was advised of the requirements for filing an opposition to the motion and that failure to oppose such a motion may be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion. In addition, by order filed September 13, 2010, the parties were directed to brief defendants' motion in accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 230(1).

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 July 15, 2009, plaintiff was 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 he has, to the motion to dismiss or a statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this be dismissed pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

DATED: November 8, 2010.