(PS) Hedrington v. David Grant Medical Center

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 8, 20232:23-cv-00801California911 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ORLONZO HEDRINGTON, No. 2:23-cv-00801-TLN-CKD (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER DAVID GRANT MEDICAL CENTER, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff, who proceeds without counsel, initiated this action with a complaint filed on April 27, 2023. (ECF No. 1.) On November 16, 2023, defendant, Fairfield Police Department, filed a motion to dismiss and noticed the motion for a hearing to take place on January 17, 2024, before the undersigned.1 (ECF No. 46.) Under the court’s Local Rules, plaintiff was to respond to the motion no less than 14 days after the motion was filed. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c) (“Opposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be in writing and shall be filed and served not less than fourteen (14) days after the motion was filed.”). Plaintiff has not filed a timely opposition to the motion to dismiss. //// 27 This action proceeds before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and E.D. Cal. Local Rule 302(c)(21).…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.