Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01380/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01380-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Walter C. Peniston, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Sun America LLC, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV10-1380-PHX-NVW

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended

Complaint. (Doc. 12.) On October 5, 2010, Plaintiff was ordered to file a response no

later than 30 days from the date of the Order. (Doc. 14.) The October 5, 2010 Order

further stated:

You must timely respond to all motions. The Court may, in its discretion,

treat your failure to respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss as a consent

to the granting of that Motion without further notice, and judgment may be

entered dismissing this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 7.2(i) of

the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. 

No response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss has been filed to date. Therefore,

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint could be dismissed under Rule 7.2(i) because of

Plaintiff’s failure to respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.

However, the Court has considered the merits of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss

and decides the Motion on the merits. The Motion to Dismiss will be granted pursuant to

Case 2:10-cv-01380-NVW Document 19 Filed 11/22/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

Rules 8(a) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the reasons stated in

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. See Moss v. U.S. Secret Service, 572 F.3d 962, 969 (9th

Cir. 2009) (complaint “must be plausibly suggestive of a claim entitling the plaintiff to

relief”).

Plaintiff already has amended his complaint once. Further leave to amend the

complaint will not be granted. See Moore v. Kayport Package Exp., Inc., 885 F.2d 531,

538 (9th Cir. 1989) (“Leave to amend need not be given if a complaint, as amended, is

subject to dismissal.”). 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s

Amended Complaint (Doc. 12) is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. 9) is

dismissed.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk to enter judgment dismissing this

action for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The Clerk shall

terminate this case.

DATED this 22nd day of November, 2010.

.

Case 2:10-cv-01380-NVW Document 19 Filed 11/22/10 Page 2 of 2