IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
May 1, 2006
GLORIA CRAIG, PLAINTIFF,
HARRAH'S ENTERTAINMENT, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, District Judge
In the instant matter, defendant Illinois Gaming Board has filed a Motion to Dismiss, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (Doc. 32), in response to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Doc. 27).Plaintiff's opposing Response was due to be filed on or before March 13, 2006. On April 12, 2006, the Court entered an Order (Doc. 46) finding that defendant Illinois Gaming Board's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Original Complaint (Doc. 16) was rendered moot by Plaintiff's filing of her First Amended Complaint. The Order further noted that defendant Illinois Gaming Board had instead filed its Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Doc. 32), which is currently pending.
To date, it appears Plaintiff has made no attempt to file her Response. Under CIVIL LOCAL RULE 7.1(c),"[f]ailure to timely file an answering brief to a motion may, in the court's discretion, be considered an admission of the merits of the motion." Plaintiff previously filed her opposing Response to defendant Illinois Gaming Board's original Motion to Dismiss (see Doc. 20), so it is unclear whether there was some confusion that has delayed her further Response.
Accordingly, the Court allows Plaintiff until Monday, May 8, 2006, in which to re-file her opposing Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. If Plaintiff does not file a responsive pleading by this new deadline, the Court, in its discretion pursuant to CIVIL LOCAL RULE 7.1(c), will deem this an admission of the merits of Defendant's Motion(Doc. 32) and thereby grant the dismissal of Plaintiff's claims against defendant Illinois Gaming Board.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 1st day of May, 2006.
David RHerndon United States District Judge
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.