The opinion of the court was delivered by: Paul L. Friedman United States District Judge
Defendant RCN Corporation moves to dismiss the complaint. Because a ruling on defendant's motion potentially could dispose of this case, the Court hereby advises this pro se plaintiff of his obligations under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the rules of this Court. See Fox v. Strickland, 837 F.2d 507 (D.C. Cir. 1988); Neal v. Kelly, 963 F.2d 453, 456 (D.C. Cir. 1992).
Plaintiffs are advised that the Court will rule on defendant's motion taking into consideration the facts proffered in the complaint, along with plaintiff's response or opposition to it. Plaintiff's attention is directed to Local Civil Rule 7(b), which states:
Within 11 days of the date of service or at such other time as the court may direct, an opposing party shall serve and file a memorandum of points and authorities in opposition to the motion. If such a memorandum is not filed within the prescribed time, the court may treat the motion as conceded.
LCvR 7(b). In addition, plaintiff's attention is directed to Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which provides:
Whenever a party must or may act within a prescribed period after service and the service is made [by mail], 3 days are added after the prescribed period would otherwise expire [under Rule 6(a)].
Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(e). The Court may treat as conceded any motion not opposed within the time limits outlined above. Alternatively, the Court may consider on the merits any motion not opposed within the time limits outlined above. Thus, failure to respond to the defendant's motion in this case carries with it the risk that the case will be dismissed.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that, on or before August 10, 2007, plaintiff shall file his opposition or response to defendant RCN Corporation's motion. If plaintiffs fail to respond timely, the Court may grant defendant's motion as conceded, and summarily may dismiss the complaint as to this defendant.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw ...