IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 12, 2009
CARLOS HENDON, PLAINTIFF,
CDCR, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
On January 27, 2009, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion.
Local Rule 78-230(m) provides in part: "Failure of the responding party to file written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion . . . ." On December 6, 2007, plaintiff was advised of the requirements for filing an opposition to the motion and that failure to oppose such a motion may be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion.
Local Rule 11-110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules "may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court." In the order filed December 6, 2007, plaintiff was advised that failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed.
Plaintiff has moved for an order compelling production of "documents requested on October 15 and 16, 2008." Docket No. 22 at 1. This court's scheduling order provided that parties had until December 12, 2008 to conduct discovery and that all requests for discovery pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 31, 33, 34 or 36 were to have been served no later than sixty days prior to that date. Docket No. 18 at 5. Accordingly, the deadline for service of discovery requests was October 13, 2008. Defendants oppose plaintiff's motion to compel on the ground that it is untimely. Docket No. 23 at 2. In reply, plaintiff states that the dates indicated on the motion to compel are a result of typographical error and should read "October 10 and 11, 2008." Docket No. 24 at 2. On April 6, 2009, the court thus ordered plaintiff to produce copies of his legal mail logs or other proof showing that he timely mailed the requests for discovery which form the basis of his motion to compel. Plaintiff filed the log on May 6th; the court deems its filing timely.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Within thirty days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any he has, to the motion to dismiss or a statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b); and
2. Defendants' response to the legal mail log is due on or before May 29, 2009.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.