Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01239/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01239-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH VENTURA, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

SOCIAL SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION.,

Defendant.

No. 2:16-cv-1239-KJN PS 

ORDER

Presently pending before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss the action, which was 

noticed for hearing on September 1, 2016. (ECF No. 6.) Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c), plaintiff 

was required to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to that motion no later than 

fourteen (14) days prior to the hearing, i.e., by August 18, 2016. E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c). Although 

that deadline has passed, the court’s records reveal that no opposition or statement of nonopposition to the motion was filed. 

It further appears that all case documents served on plaintiff by the defendant, including 

the notice of removal and the instant motion to dismiss, have been returned as undeliverable. 

Plaintiff has also not provided the court or defendant with notice of any address change in 

accordance with Local Rule 182(f). 

////

Case 2:16-cv-01239-TLN-KJN Document 8 Filed 08/22/16 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

The court has considered whether the case should be dismissed or other sanctions imposed 

based on plaintiff’s failures. Nevertheless, in light of plaintiff’s pro se status, and the court’s 

desire to resolve the action on the merits, the court finds it appropriate to grant plaintiff an 

additional final opportunity to oppose the motion.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The September 1, 2016 hearing on defendant’s motion to dismiss is VACATED. 

2. Plaintiff shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion no later 

than September 5, 2016.

3. Any reply brief by defendant shall be due no later than September 19, 2016.

4. Thereafter, the motion will be submitted for decision without oral argument on the 

record and written briefing pursuant to Local Rule 230(g). If the court subsequently 

determines that oral argument is necessary, the parties will be notified. 

5. Failure to timely file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion to 

dismiss will result in the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal of the action 

with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August 22, 2016

Case 2:16-cv-01239-TLN-KJN Document 8 Filed 08/22/16 Page 2 of 2