Green
(PS) Mehl v. Green
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GAVIN MEHL, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-01861-TLN-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED
13 v. FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH LOCAL
RULES
14 WARREN GREEN, et al., ECF No. 44 15 Defendants.
16 17 On November 9, 2022, defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ second amended 18 complaint. ECF No. 4. To date, plaintiffs have not filed a response to the motion. 19 Under the court’s local rules, a responding party is required to file an opposition or 20 statement of non-opposition to a motion no later than fourteen days after the date it was filed. 21 E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c). To manage its docket effectively, the court requires litigants to meet 22 certain deadlines. The court may impose sanctions, including dismissing a case, for failure to 23 comply with its orders or local rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E.D. Cal. L.R. 110; Hells Canyon 24 Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir.…