Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-01573/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-01573-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

Laurence M. Linden,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Joe Arpaio, et al.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 05-1573-PHX-EHC (DKD)

ORDER

On February 13, 2006, Defendant Arpaio filed a Motion to Dismiss alleging that

Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before filing this law suit. (Dkt. 8.)

On the same day, Magistrate Judge Duncan issued an order setting out the deadlines to

respond to the Motion to Dismiss. (Dkt. 9.) Magistrate Judge Duncan advised that

[t]he failure of Plaintiff to respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss may in

the discretion of the Court be deemed a consent to the granting of that Motion

without further notice, and judgment may be entered dismissing the complaint

and action with prejudice to LRCiv 7.2(i). See Brydges v. Lewis, 18 F.3d 651

(9th Cir. 1994) (per curiam). 

Order dated February 13, 2006, p. 2 (Dkt. 9.) Rule 7.2(i) of the Local Rules of Civil

Procedure for the District of Arizona provides that "if the opposing party does not serve and

file the required answering memoranda, . . . such non-compliance may be deemed a consent

to the denial or granting of the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily."

//

//

//

Case 2:05-cv-01573-EHC-DKD Document 10 Filed 04/28/06 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 -

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Court will dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint without further

notice to Plaintiff if he fails to show cause within 30 days from the date of this order for his

failure to respond to Defendant Arpaio's Motion to Dismiss. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED withdrawing the reference to the current Magistrate

Judge as to the Motion to Dismiss. (Dkt. 8.) All other matters shall remain before the

Magistrate Judge for disposition as appropriate. 

DATED this 25th day of April, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-01573-EHC-DKD Document 10 Filed 04/28/06 Page 2 of 2