WALKER v. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 2:11-CV-01640-PMP-GWF. (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Nevada
Number: infdco20120127m08
Visitors: 18
Filed: Jan. 27, 2012
Latest Update: Jan. 27, 2012
Summary: ORDER PHILIP M. PRO, District Judge. Before the Court for consideration is Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #6). Notwithstanding the order of the court extending the deadline by which Plaintiff was required to respond to Defendant's Motion, Plaintiff has failed to do so. As a result, Plaintiff consents to the granting of Defendants' Motion. Moreover, a review of Defendants' Motion shows Defendant is entitled to the relief requested on the merits. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants'
Summary: ORDER PHILIP M. PRO, District Judge. Before the Court for consideration is Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #6). Notwithstanding the order of the court extending the deadline by which Plaintiff was required to respond to Defendant's Motion, Plaintiff has failed to do so. As a result, Plaintiff consents to the granting of Defendants' Motion. Moreover, a review of Defendants' Motion shows Defendant is entitled to the relief requested on the merits. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants' M..
More
ORDER
PHILIP M. PRO, District Judge.
Before the Court for consideration is Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #6). Notwithstanding the order of the court extending the deadline by which Plaintiff was required to respond to Defendant's Motion, Plaintiff has failed to do so. As a result, Plaintiff consents to the granting of Defendants' Motion. Moreover, a review of Defendants' Motion shows Defendant is entitled to the relief requested on the merits.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #6) is GRANTED.
Source: Leagle
