(PS) Stewart v. Property and Casualty Ins. Co. of Hartford

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 COLLEEN STEWART, No. 2:17–cv–2418–TLN–KJN PS 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 PROPERTY AND CASUALTY

INSURANCE CO. OF HARTFORD,

15 Defendant. 16 17 On June 19, 2020, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF Nos. 61.) 18 Plaintiff failed to respond or submit her own motion by the deadline, and so the court vacated the 19 hearing. See Local Rule 230 (“Opposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be in 20 writing and shall be filed and served not less than fourteen (14) days preceding the [] hearing date 21 . . . No party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if opposition 22 to the motion has not been timely filed by that party.”) (citing L.R. 135). Rather than construe 23 plaintiff’s failure to respond as non-opposition, the court set an additional deadline for plaintiff to 24 respond. (See L.R. 230(c) (“A failure to file a timely opposition may also be construed by the 25 Court as a non-opposition to the motion.”) Plaintiff then…