Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. v. Allen Engineering Contractor, Inc. ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SUNBELT RENTALS, INC., No. 2:20-cv-1246 MCE CKD 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. ORDER VACATING HEARING AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 ALLEN ENGINEERING CONTRACTOR, INC., et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff Sunbelt Rentals, Inc., has filed a second motion for default judgment against 18 defendant Roger A. Tate, who currently proceeds pro se in this case. Plaintiff’s first motion for 19 default judgment was denied without prejudice as to defendant Tate after Tate opposed the 20 motion and indicated that he intended to answer the first amended complaint. 21 Plaintiff noticed the renewed motion for default judgment for a hearing to take place on 22 July 7, 2021. Plaintiff served defendant Tate with a copy of the motion by mail. (ECF No. 40.) To 23 date, Tate has not filed an opposition to the motion, a statement of non-opposition, nor sought an 24 extension of time to do so. Accordingly, the hearing set for July 7, 2021 will be vacated and, if 25 appropriate, reset at a later date. 26 Local Rule 230(l) provides, in part: 27 Opposition, if any, to the granting of [a] motion shall be in writing and shall be filed and served not less than fourteen (14) days 28 preceding the noticed (or continued) hearing date. A responding ] party who has no opposition to the granting of the motion shall serve and file a statement to that effect, specifically designating the motion 2 in question. No party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if opposition to the motion has not been 3 timely filed by that party. See L.R. 135. A failure to file a timely opposition may also be construed by the Court as a non-opposition 4 to the motion. 5 || Local Rule 230(1); see also Local Rule 183 (“All obligations placed on ‘counsel’ by these Rules 6 || apply to individuals appearing in propria persona.”); King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 7 || 1987) (Pro se litigants must follow the same rules of procedure that govern other litigants.”’) 8 | (overruled on other grounds by Lacey v. Maricopa County, 693 F.3d 896 (9th Cir. 2012)). 9 Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED: 10 1. The July 7, 2021 hearing on defendant’s motion for default judgment against 1] defendant Tate is vacated, and, if appropriate, will be re-set at a later date; and 12 2. Defendant Roger A. Tate is ordered to show cause, in writing and within 14 days, why 13 his failure to oppose the motion for default judgment should not be construed as a non- 14 opposition to the granting of the motion. 15 || Dated: June 28, 2021 □□ id aed aay _ AA i [+ L . 4 \ } 16 CAROLYN K. DELANEY 17 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 8.Sunbelt.20cv1246.0sc.nooppo 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28