Alexander v. Hilton Hotels Worldwide
- Thomas Hixson
- 3:24-cv-00830
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Alexander v. Hilton Hotels Worldwide, Judge Hixson ordered Liam Alexander to explain his missed filing and warned the case could be dismissed.
Liam Alexander must respond to the order and the pending motion by the stated deadline. The defendants may file a reply if he files an opposition. The order does not state that the case was dismissed.
What happened
In Alexander v. Hilton Hotels Worldwide, Defendant Justice Operating Company had asked the court to dismiss the case. Liam Alexander did not file an opposition that followed the court’s local rule.
The court vacated the scheduled June 6, 2024 hearing and ordered Alexander to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failing to pursue it and meet court deadlines. It required him to file a declaration and either an opposition or a statement that he did not oppose the motion by June 6.
Judge Thomas S. Hixson warned that failing to respond in writing would be treated as an admission that Alexander did not intend to pursue the case and that the case would likely be dismissed. The order did not dismiss the case.
The detailed version
- Alexander v. Hilton Hotels Worldwide · No. 3:24-cv-00830
- Thomas Hixson
- May 23, 2024
Background
Justice Operating Company had filed a motion to dismiss. The opinion states that Liam Alexander failed to file an opposition complying with Civil Local Rule 7. The order does not decide whether Justice Operating Company’s motion to dismiss should be granted.
Order to Show Cause
The court vacated the noticed June 6, 2024 hearing. It ordered Alexander to show cause—meaning to explain—why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court deadlines. Alexander was ordered to file a declaration by June 6, 2024, and at the same time file either an opposition complying with Civil Local Rule 7-3(a) or a statement of nonopposition complying with Local Rule 7-3(b). If he filed an opposition, the defendants could file a reply by June 13, 2024.
Disposition
The court warned that failing to file a written response would be treated as an admission that Alexander did not intend to pursue the case and that the case would likely be dismissed. The order itself does not dismiss the case or rule on the motion to dismiss. Judge Thomas S. Hixson signed the order as a United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.