(PC) Garcia v. Baniga

Opinion

JOSE GARCIA, 1:19-cv-01258-GSA-PC

Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF v. NON-OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT ROLAND RODRIGUEZ’S MOTION TO U. BANIGA, M.D., et al., COMPEL WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

Defendants. (ECF No. 23.)

On July 2, 2020, defendant Roland Rodriguez (“Defendant”) filed a motion to compel. (ECF No. 23.) Plaintiff was required to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion within twenty-one days, but has not done so. Local Rule 230(l). Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper grounds for dismissal. U.S. v. Warren, 601 F.2d 471, 474 (9th Cir. 1979). Moreover, when the court orders Plaintiff to respond to a motion, the court may dismiss an action for Plaintiff's failure to comply with the court’s order. See Local Rule 110; Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002) Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Within thirty days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion to compel filed by Defendant on July 2, 2020; and 2. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this action. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 17, 2020 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE