Chaderick A. Ingram v. The University of Phoenix, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California ordered plaintiff Chaderick A. Ingram to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for failing to respond to the defendant's motion to dismiss. The court continued the hearing, set deadlines for plaintiff's opposition and response to the order, and warned that failure to comply would result in dismissal.

Holdings

1. Under Eastern District of California Local Rule 230(c), plaintiff was required to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition no later than fourteen days after defendant filed the motion.
2. The court may impose sanctions, including dismissal, for failure to comply with court orders or local rules, and plaintiff's failure to respond to the order to show cause would result in dismissal of the action.
3. The hearings on defendant's motion to dismiss and plaintiff's motion for summary judgment were continued from November 13, 2025, to December 18, 2025.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff's failure to file a timely opposition or statement of non-opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss warranted an order to show cause and potential sanctions.
2. Whether the hearings on defendant's motion to dismiss and plaintiff's motion for summary judgment should be continued.

Disposition

other