Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01852/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01852-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 152
Nature of Suit: Recovery of Defaulted Student Loans
Cause of Action: 20:1080 Student Loan Recovery

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, CIV. NO. S- 09-1852 JAM GGH PS

vs.

JOSEPH J. DEKELLIS,

Defendant. ORDER AND

 /

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this action, referred to the undersigned pursuant to

Local Rules 72-302(c)(21) and 302(c)(16) (actions brought pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1071

involving federally insured student loans. Defendant’s motion to dismiss is presently noticed for

hearing on the April 29, 2010, law and motion calendar of the undersigned. Opposition to

motions, or a statement of non-opposition thereto, must be filed fourteen days preceding the

noticed hearing date. E.D. Cal. L. R. 78-230(c). Court records reflect that the government failed

to file opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion. 

Failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be grounds for imposition by the

Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the

Court.” E.D. Cal. L. R. 11-110; see Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995). 

Additionally, “[n]o party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments

Case 2:09-cv-01852-JAM-GGH Document 24 Filed 04/27/10 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

 Moreover, failure to appear at hearing may be deemed withdrawal of opposition to a 1

motion or may result in sanctions. E.D. Cal. L. R. 78-230(j). 

2

if written opposition to the motion has not been timely filed.” E.D. Cal. L. R. 78-230(c). Pro se

1

litigants are bound by the rules of procedure, even though pleadings are liberally construed in

their favor. King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987); Jacobsen v. Filler, 790 F.2d 1362,

1364-65 (9th Cir.1986). The Local Rules specifically provide that cases of persons appearing in

propria persona who fail to comply with the Federal and Local Rules are subject to dismissal,

judgment by default, and other appropriate sanctions. E.D. Cal. L. R. 83-183. 

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The hearing date of April 29, 2010 is vacated. Hearing on defendant’s motion 

is continued to May 20, 2010.

2. The government shall show cause, in writing, no later than May 6, 2010 why

sanctions should not be imposed for failure timely to file opposition or a statement of nonopposition to the pending motion.

3. The government is directed to file opposition, if any, to the motion, or a

statement of non-opposition thereto, no later than May 6, 2010. Failure to file opposition and

appear at hearing, or to file a statement of non-opposition, will be deemed a statement of nonopposition, and shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

DATED: April 27, 2010

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

 U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:076:DeKellis1852.osc.wpd

Case 2:09-cv-01852-JAM-GGH Document 24 Filed 04/27/10 Page 2 of 2