IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 21, 2010
RODNEY KARL BLACKWELL, PLAINTIFF,
C/O PIZZOLA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action. On March 12, 2010, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion.
Local Rule 230(l) 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 . . . ." The court filed an order on May 18, 2009 advising plaintiff 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 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 May 18, 2009, plaintiff was advised that failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed.
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to defendants' March 12, 2010 motion for summary judgment. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation for the dismissal of this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Defendants shall file a reply, if any, in accordance with Local Rule 230(l).
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.