Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gomez v. Chenik

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 28, 2009

SILVESTER GOMEZ, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CHENIK, M.D., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Arthur L. Alarcón United States Circuit Judge Sitting by Designation

ORDER

On April 27, 2009, Defendants Thirakomen and Hasadsri ("Defendants") filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 78-230(m) pursuant to the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. (Doc. 63). Defendant Hasadsri has also filed an additional declaration in support of this motion. (Doc. 64).

Plaintiff shall file an opposition "not more than eighteen (18) days, plus three (3) days for mailing . . . after the date of service of the motion." L.R. 78-230(m). If Plaintiff does not oppose Defendants' motion, he shall "serve and file a statement to that effect, specifically designating the motion in question." Id. Plaintiff's " [f]ailure . . . to file opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion and may result in the imposition of sanctions." Id.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff file an opposition or a statement of no opposition in response to Defendants' motion for summary judgment on or before May 19, 2009.

20090428

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.