Burcher

Burcher v. Lawhead

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaNovember 13, 20193:18-cv-02559California1,306 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

18 Plaintiffs originally filed this action on November 8, 2018, alleging violations of 19 their Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. §1983, and various state law 20 claims. See generally Doc. No. 1. On May 24, 2019, Defendant Kimberly Lawhead moved 21 to dismiss the Complaint for failure to state a claim. Doc. No. 11. Pursuant to Civ. L. R. 22 7.1(e)(2) & (4), Plaintiffs’ opposition to Defendant’s motion to dismiss was due to be filed 23 and served no later than June 14, 2019, based on the July 1, 2019, hearing date. See Civ. 24 L. R. 7.1(e)(2) & (4). On June 21, 2019, Defendant Kimberly Lawhead filed a Notice of 25 Lack of Opposition to Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Doc. No. 12. 26 // 27 // 28 DISCUSSION Defendant seeks to dismiss the instant action for failure to state a claim. Plaintiffs have filed no response to the motion. The Ninth Circuit has held that a district court may properly grant a motion to dismiss as unopposed pursuant to a local rule that permits, but does not require, the granting of a motion for failure to respond. See generally, Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th 7 …

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.