(PC) Hammler v. Lyons

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

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 J. LYONS, et al., AND MONETARY SANCTIONS, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS 15 Defendants. (ECF No. 57.)

18 On March 4, 2022, defendant Lucas (“Defendant”) filed a motion for terminating and 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 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 of any opposition to the granting of the motion . . .” The court may deem any failure to oppose Defendant’s motion as a waiver, and recommend that the motion be granted on that basis. Failure 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 comply with the court’s order. See Local Rule 110; Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (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.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9 Dated: May 3, 2022 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE