Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01021/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01021-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 29:201 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

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 

PRASHANT KATYAL, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

MEGAN J. BRENNAN, Postmaster 

General, United States Postal Service, 

Defendants. 

No. 2:15-cv-1021-TLN-EFB PS 

ORDER 

 Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, and noticed the motion for hearing on 

January 25, 2015. ECF No. 13. Plaintiff failed to timely file an opposition or statement of nonopposition to the motion in violation of Local Rule 230. Accordingly, the hearing on the motion 

for summary judgment was continued to February 15, 2017, and plaintiff was ordered to show 

cause, in writing, by no later than February 1, 2017, why sanction should not be imposed for his 

failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the pending motion. ECF 

No. 15. Plaintiff was also ordered to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition by 

February 1, 2017, and admonished that failure to file an opposition would be deemed a statement 

of non-opposition to defendant’s motion to dismiss. Id. 

 In response, plaintiff explains that a medical condition prevented him from timely filing 

an opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendant’s motion. ECF No. 16. He further 

Case 2:15-cv-01021-TLN-EFB Document 18 Filed 02/07/17 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

states that he is scheduled to undergo back surgery, and therefore he requires an additional 30 

days to respond to the pending motion. In light of plaintiff’s representations, the order to show 

cause is discharged and no sanctions are imposed. Further, the court grants plaintiff’s request for 

additional time to respond to defendant’s motion. 

 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 

 1. The January 13, 2017 order to show cause (ECF No. 15) is discharged and no sanctions 

are imposed. 

 2. Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time to respond to defendant’s motion for 

summary judgment (ECF No. 16) is granted. 

 3. The hearing on defendant’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 13) is continued 

to March 15, 2017. 

 4. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition thereto, 

no later than March 1, 2017. 

 5. Failure to file an opposition to the motion will be deemed a statement of nonopposition thereto, and may result in a recommendation that defendant’s motion be granted 

and/or the action be dismissed for lack of prosecution and/or for failure to comply with court 

orders and this court’s Local Rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 

 6. Defendant may file a reply to plaintiff’s opposition, if any, on or before March 8, 2017. 

DATED: February 6, 2017. 

Case 2:15-cv-01021-TLN-EFB Document 18 Filed 02/07/17 Page 2 of 2