(PC) Hammler v. Lyons ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALLEN HAMMLER, 1:19-cv-01650-AWI-GSA-PC 12 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF 13 vs. NON-OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT LUCAS’S MOTION FOR TERMINATING 14 J. LYONS, et al., AND MONETARY SANCTIONS, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS 15 Defendants. (ECF No. 57.) 16 17 18 On March 4, 2022, defendant Lucas (“Defendant”) filed a motion for terminating and 19 monetary sanctions for Plaintiff’s willful failure to participate in a deposition. (ECF No. 57.) 20 Plaintiff Allen Hammler was required to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to 21 the motion within twenty-one days, but has not done so. Local Rule 230(l). 22 Local Rule 230(l) provides that the failure to oppose a motion “may be deemed a waiver 23 of any opposition to the granting of the motion . . .” The court may deem any failure to oppose 24 Defendant’s motion as a waiver, and recommend that the motion be granted on that basis. Failure 25 to follow a district court’s local rules is also a proper grounds for dismissal. U.S. v. Warren, 601 26 F.2d 471, 474 (9th Cir. 1979). The court may also dismiss this case for Plaintiff’s failure to 27 comply with the court’s order. See Local Rule 110; Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 28 (9th Cir. 2002). 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Within thirty days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file an 3 opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion for terminating and 4 monetary sanctions filed by Defendant Lucas on March 4, 2022; and 5 2. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of this 6 action. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 Dated: May 3, 2022 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28