(PS) Prentice v. Wells Fargo Bank NA.

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JEAN-PAUL PRENTICE, et al., No. 2:25-cv-01276-DJC-CKD (PS) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. WELLS FARGO BANK NA., et al., 15 Defendants.

18 On July 14, 2025, defendants LeafFilter North, LLC and LeafFilter International, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs Jean-Paul Prentice and Virginia G. Prentice’s complaint and noticed the motion for hearing on August 27, 2025, before the undersigned. (ECF No. 13.) On July 24, 2025, defendant Wells Fargo Bank joined in defendants LeafFilter North and Leaf Filter International’s motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 16.) Pursuant to this court’s Local Rules, any opposition to the motion was to be filed and served no later than fourteen (14) days after the date the motion was filed. Further, a responding party who has no opposition to the granting of the motion is required to serve and file a statement of non-opposition. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c) (“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 in question.”). That deadline has now passed, and plaintiffs have not filed either a statement of opposition or a statement of non- opposition to defendants’ motions.

3 A district court may impose sanctions, including involuntary dismissal of a plaintiff’s case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), where that plaintiff fails to prosecute his or her case or fails to comply with the court’s orders, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or the court’s local rules. See e.g., Hells Canyon Preservation Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (stating that courts may dismiss an action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure to prosecute or comply with the rules of civil procedure or the court’s orders); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992) (“Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), the district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with any order of the court.”).

12 Here, plaintiffs, who proceed without counsel, failed to file a written opposition or statement of non-opposition by the required deadlines, and therefore have not complied with Local Rule 230(c). Plaintiffs’ failure to file any opposition indicates to the court that plaintiffs may be consenting to the dismissal of this action. See Local Rule 230(c) (“A failure to file a timely opposition may also be construed by the Court as a non-opposition to the motion.”). Thus, plaintiffs’ claims are subject to dismissal.

18 Given plaintiffs’ pro se status, the court will not recommend dismissal at this time.

19 Instead, the court will vacate the August 27, 2025, hearing and provide plaintiffs one final opportunity to either respond to defendants’ motion to dismiss or to file a statement of non- opposition. After the expiration of the deadlines below, the court will decide the matter on the record and written briefing only. See L.R. 230(c) (“No party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if opposition to the motion has not been timely filed by that party.”). Plaintiffs are cautioned that any further failure to comply with the court’s Local Rules and this order by failing to file either an opposition or statement of non-opposition will be construed as non-opposition to the motions and will constitute additional grounds for dismissal under Rule 41(b).

28 //// 1 ORDER 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The August 27, 2025, hearing on defendants LeafFilter North and LeafFilter 4 International’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 13) is VACATED; 5 2. Within fourteen (14) days of this order, plaintiffs shall file a written opposition or a 6 statement of non-opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss; 7 a. Plaintiffs’ failure to file written oppositions will be deemed statements of non- 8 opposition to the pending motions and consent to the granting of the motions, 9 and shall constitute an additional ground for the imposition of appropriate 10 sanctions, including a recommendation that plaintiffs’ entire case be 11 involuntarily dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 12 Procedure 41(b); 13 3. Within seven (7) days of any opposition, defendants may file a written reply; and 14 4. The matter is deemed submitted on the papers.

15 | Dated: August 4, 2025 / 20 } if | Ld □ a 16 CAROLYN K DELANEY 17 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 5, pren.1276.25