(PS) Nicoletta v. Experian Information Solutions

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: July 17, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-01915
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SOPHIA NICOLETTA, Case No. 2:24-cv-1915-DAD-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, et al., 15 Defendants, 16

17 On June 17, 2025, defendant Trans Union LLC filed a motion for judgment on the 18 pleadings. ECF No. 22. To date, plaintiff has not responded to defendant’s motion. 19 Under the court’s local rules, a responding party is required to file an opposition or 20 statement of non-opposition to a motion no later than fourteen days after the date it was filed. 21 E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c). To manage its docket effectively, the court requires litigants to meet 22 certain deadlines. The court may impose sanctions, including dismissing a case, for failure to 23 comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; Hells Canyon 24 Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 25 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988). Involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty, but a district court has a 26 duty to administer justice expeditiously and avoid needless burden for the parties. See 27 Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002); Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. 28 1 The court will give plaintiff the opportunity to explain why sanctions should not be 2 | imposed for failure to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendant’s motion. 3 | Plaintiff's failure to respond to this order will constitute a failure to comply with a court order and 4 | will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 5 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 6 1. The July 31, 2025 hearing on defendant Trans Union LLC’s motion for judgment on 7 | the pleadings and defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc.’s motion to dismiss is 8 | continued to August 28, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. 9 2. By no later than August 7, 2025, plaintiff shall file an opposition or statement of non- 10 || opposition to Trans Union LLC’s motion. 11 3. Plaintiff shall show cause, by no later than August 7, 2025, why sanctions should not 12 | be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendants’ 13 || motion. 14 4. Defendant Trans Union LLC may file a reply to plaintiff's opposition, if any, no later 15 | than August 21, 2025. 16 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 ( 1 Oy — Dated: _ July 17, 2025 Q——— 19 JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28