Pina-Rodriquez v. Koenigsmann

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Cite if. □ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK & Vincent L, Ri” □ L of “SHCcetty 8 □□ sk se ae tt a tt SK LEONARD PINA-RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff, ‘ ‘ ORDER : : 18 CV 5167 (VB) CORRECTIONAL DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, ©: | □□ INC., U.S. MOBILE IMAGING, LLC, and GARY GARBUTT, : Defendants. : □□ □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ □□□ mamma ry \ □□□ | VY □□ □ □ On October 5, 2020, defendants U.S. Mobile Imaging, LLC “U.S. Mobile”) and Gary Garbutt moved to dismiss plaintiff’s second amended complaint. (Doc. #71). That day, defendants U.S. Mobile and Gary Garbutt served a copy of the motion and all supporting papers on plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, via regular mail. (See Doc. #71-2).

Plaintiff’s opposition to defendants’ motion was due October 22, 2020. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d); Local Civil Rule 6.1(b). To date, no opposition has been filed.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The Court sua sponte extends plaintiff’s time to oppose defendants’ motion to dismiss the second amended complaint to November 30, 2020. Defendants U.S. Mobile and Gary Garbutt’s reply, if any, is due December 7, 2020.

2. If plaintiff fails to respond to the motion by November 30, 2020, the motion will be deemed fully submitted and unopposed.

The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purposes of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).

Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to plaintiff at the address on the docket.

October 28, 2020 White Plains, NY SO Natl |X — Vincent L. Briccetti United States District Judge