1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 LORRAINE BONNER, Case No. 19-cv-05841-HSG 8 Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY MOTION SHOULD NOT BE 9 v. GRANTED 10 COVIDIEN, LP., et al., Re: Dkt. No. 13 11 Defendants. 12 Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on October 22, 2019. Dkt. No. 13. The parties filed 13 || a stipulation to extend the briefing schedule, which the Court granted on November 7, 2019. Dkt. 14 || No. 20. Per the Court’s order, Plaintiff's opposition was due on November 19, 2019. Id. 3 15 To date, Plaintiff has not filed her opposition. The Court may interpret a failure to oppose 16 |} a motion as a concession that the motion should be granted. See GN Resound A/S v. Callpod, Inc., 3 17 || No. C 11-04673 SBA,

, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2013) (construing plaintiffs 18 || failure to oppose defendant’s argument as a concession of said argument); see also Marziano v. 19 || Cty of Marin, No. C-10-2740 EMC,

, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 4, 2010) 20 || (interpreting plaintiffs failure to oppose defendant’s motion to dismiss as a concession that the 21 claim at issue should be dismissed). 22 Because Plaintiff failed to oppose Defendants’ motion within the mandated period, the 23 Court may, in its discretion, grant Defendants’ motion. See Marziano,

, at *4. 24 || The Court thus ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause by November 27, 2019 why Defendants’ motion 25 || should not be granted in light of Plaintiffs failure to oppose the motion. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 || Dated: 11/25/2019 Abaspwrd 5 dbl). HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. 28 United States District Judge