Charlie Vigiani v. FCA US, LLC

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHARLIE VIGIANI, No. 2:24-cv-03675-JAM-SCR 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 14 FCA US, LLC, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On January 23, 2026, Defendant FCA US, LLC filed a motion 18 for summary judgment (see ECF No. 12), which was unopposed. 19 Summary judgment is appropriate when the record, read in the 20 light most favorable to the non-moving party, indicates “that 21 there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the 22 movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. 23 P. 56(a); Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 157 (1970); 24 U.S. v. Diebold, Inc., 369 U.S. 654, 655 (1962). 25 Local Rule 230 governs civil motion practice in this 26 district, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78, and 27 requires any opposition, or statement of non-opposition, to be 28 filed within 14 days of a lodged motion. E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c). em EE III IE IIE IIE INE IE I ROS IIE IEE IGE IIE

1 Rule 56(e) (3) authorizes summary judgment when “a party fails to 2 properly support an assertion of fact or fails to properly 3 address another party’s assertion of fact ... □□□ and the Court 4 may construe the “failure to file a timely opposition ...asa 5 | non-opposition to the motion.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56; E.D. Cal. 6 L.R. 230(c). To date, Plaintiff has not filed any response to 7 Defendant’s pending motion for summary judgment. See Docket. 8 In its motion for summary judgment, Defendant has 9 demonstrated it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law 10 because there is no genuine dispute of material fact, even when 11 | viewing the record in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff. 12 See ECF No. 12; Adickes, 398 U.S. at 157. Defendant is correct 13 that Rodriguez v. FCA US, LLC, 17 Cal.5th 189 (2024), is 14 dispositive. ECF No. 12 at pg. 1, 4-5. The undisputed record 15 shows the vehicle at issue does not meet the statutory definition 16 of a “new motor vehicle” under the Song-Beverly Act, which is the 17 | basis for all of Plaintiff’s claims in this case. See id.; see 18 also ECF No. 1. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion for summary 19 | judgment (ECF No. 12) is granted in its entirety, and the Court 20 hereby enters judgment in favor of the Defendant. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: March 18, 2026 23 Se Z J (Paras HN A. MENDEZ. 24 SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 25 26 27 28