Summary
stating it is the movant's burden to show no claim has been stated
Summary of this case from Ortega v. University of PacificOpinion
Case No. 1:12-cv-01377 LJO JLT
01-24-2013
KEVIN D. BRYANT, Plaintiff, v. APOTEX, INC., et al., Defendants.
ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE
(Doc. 45)
On January 2, 2013, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed on him for failing to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings as previously ordered by the Court. (Doc. 45.) On January 22, 2013, Plaintiff filed his response. Plaintiff asserts that he had no access to the prison law library from December 18, 2012 to December 27, 2012 due to the Christmas holiday. Plaintiff further asserts that the copy machine was broken from December 27, 2012 to at least January 2, 2013. Thus, according to Plaintiff, he was unable to file his opposition papers and his request for an extension of time in a more timely fashion.
Good cause having been shown, the Court hereby DISCHARGES its January 2, 2013 order to show cause. Nevertheless, the Court takes this opportunity to remind Plaintiff that deadlines set by the Court will be strictly enforced. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Lawrence J. O'Neill
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE