IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
December 5, 2008
NANCY MELENDEZ, PLAINTIFF
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA, DEFENDANT
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Christopher C. Conner United States District Judge
AND NOW, this 5th day of December, 2008, upon consideration of the report of the magistrate judge (Doc. 23), recommending that plaintiff's claim be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), and it appearing defendant has filed a motion for summary judgment (Doc. 15), to which plaintiff has failed to file a brief in opposition as required by Local Rule 7.6, and that plaintiff was expressly ordered to file a brief in opposition by the order of court dated July 31, 2008 (see Doc. 22),*fn1 it is hereby ORDERED that, on or before December 19, 2008, plaintiff shall file a response showing cause why defendant's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 15) should not be deemed unopposed, and why the above-captioned action should be not dismissed for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with the rules and order of this court. See L.R. 7.6; see also FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); Poulis v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 747 F.2d 863, 868 (3d Cir. 1984).