(PC) Moody v. Gonzalez

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: March 5, 2025
• Docket: 2:22-cv-01342
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KAYSHON LAMONT MOODY, Case No. 2:22-cv-1342-DC-JDP (P) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 D. GONZALEZ, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On December 12, 2024, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 34. 18 To date, plaintiff has not filed an opposition or a statement of non-opposition.1 19 To manage its docket effectively, the court requires litigants to meet certain deadlines. 20 The court may impose sanctions, including dismissing a case, for failure to comply with its orders 21 1 Plaintiff recently filed a document inquiring about the status of his case. ECF No. 37. 22 Plaintiff is instructed that on December 12, 2024, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 34. Pursuant to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and Local Rule 23 230(l), plaintiff has an obligation to file a response. Local Rule 230(l) states: 24 Opposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be served and filed by the responding party not more than twenty-one (21) days 25 after the date of service of the motion. A responding party who has no opposition to the granting of the motion shall serve and file a 26 statement to that effect, specifically designating the motion in question. Failure of the responding party to file an opposition or to 27 file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion and may result in the 28 imposition of sanctions. 1 | □□ local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. 2 | Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 3 | 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a district court has a duty to administer 4 | justice expeditiously and to avoid needless burden for the parties. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 5 | F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. 6 I will give plaintiff a chance to explain why the court should not dismiss the case based on 7 | his failure to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition. Plaintiff's failure to respond to 8 | this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and will result in a 9 | recommendation that this action be dismissed. Accordingly, plaintiff is ordered to show cause 10 | within twenty-one days why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure 11 || to comply with local rules. Should plaintiff wish to continue with this lawsuit, he shall file, 12 | within twenty-one days, an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion. 13 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 ( 1 ow — Dated: _ March 4, 2025 q-—— 16 JEREMY D. PETERSON 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28