From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. McDonald's Corp.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 30, 2021
2:20-cv-1214 TLN DB PS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 30, 2021)

Opinion

2:20-cv-1214 TLN DB PS

07-30-2021

KIRK D. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. MCDONALD'S CORPORATION, Defendant.


ORDER

DEBORAH BARNES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Kirk Williams is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On July 6, 2021, defendant noticed a motion to dismiss plaintiff's second amended complaint for hearing before the undersigned on August 6, 2021. (ECF No. 24.) Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c) plaintiff was to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendant's motion “not less than fourteen (14) days preceding the noticed . . . hearing date.” Plaintiff, however, has failed to file a timely opposition or statement of non-opposition.

The failure of a party to comply with the Local Rules or any order of the court “may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.” Local Rule 110. Any individual representing himself or herself without an attorney is bound by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules, and all applicable law. Local Rule 183(a). Failure to comply with applicable rules and law may be grounds for dismissal or any other sanction appropriate under the Local Rules. Id.

In light of plaintiff's pro se status, and in the interests of justice, the court will provide plaintiff with an opportunity to show good cause for plaintiff's conduct along with a final opportunity to oppose defendant's motion.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff show cause in writing within fourteen days of the date of this order for plaintiff's failure to file a timely opposition or statement of non-opposition;

2. The August 6, 2021 hearing of defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 24) is continued to Friday, September 10, 2021, at 10:00 a.m., at the United States District Court, 501 I Street, Sacramento, California, in Courtroom No. 27, before the undersigned;

3. On or before August 27, 2021, plaintiff shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss; and

Alternatively, if plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this civil action, plaintiff may comply with this order by filing a request for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

4. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in the recommendation that this case be dismissed.


Summaries of

Williams v. McDonald's Corp.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 30, 2021
2:20-cv-1214 TLN DB PS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 30, 2021)
Case details for

Williams v. McDonald's Corp.

Case Details

Full title:KIRK D. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. MCDONALD'S CORPORATION, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jul 30, 2021

Citations

2:20-cv-1214 TLN DB PS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 30, 2021)