TALLEY v. EPISCOPAL COMMUNITY SERVICES, 16-cv-05313-MEJ. (2016)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20161021a92
Visitors: 7
Filed: Oct. 20, 2016
Latest Update: Oct. 20, 2016
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE MARIA-ELENA JAMES , Magistrate Judge . On September 23, 2016, Defendant Episcopal Community Services filed a Motion to Dismiss, with a noticed hearing date of December 1, 2016. Dkt. No. 7. However, Plaintiff failed to file an opposition pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7. Accordingly, the Court hereby VACATES the motion hearing and ORDERS Plaintiff Jerome Talley to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court
Summary: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE MARIA-ELENA JAMES , Magistrate Judge . On September 23, 2016, Defendant Episcopal Community Services filed a Motion to Dismiss, with a noticed hearing date of December 1, 2016. Dkt. No. 7. However, Plaintiff failed to file an opposition pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7. Accordingly, the Court hereby VACATES the motion hearing and ORDERS Plaintiff Jerome Talley to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court d..
More
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
MARIA-ELENA JAMES, Magistrate Judge.
On September 23, 2016, Defendant Episcopal Community Services filed a Motion to Dismiss, with a noticed hearing date of December 1, 2016. Dkt. No. 7. However, Plaintiff failed to file an opposition pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7. Accordingly, the Court hereby VACATES the motion hearing and ORDERS Plaintiff Jerome Talley to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court deadlines. Plaintiff shall file a declaration by November 1, 2016. If a responsive declaration is filed, the Court shall either issue an order based on the declaration or set a hearing on the matter. Notice is hereby provided that failure to file a written response will be deemed an admission that Plaintiff does not intend to prosecute, and the case will be dismissed without prejudice. Thus, it is imperative that the Court receive a written response by the deadline above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
