IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 2, 2010
JESSE LEE SHAVERS, JR., PLAINTIFF,
D. CLARK, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
On September 21, 2010, defendants filed a motion to dismiss. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. Plaintiff has, however, filed a notice of change of address, in compliance with Local Rule 183(b). In that notice, he also states that officials at other prisons have deprived him of his property, including legal materials, in retaliation for filing unspecified complaints. He requests assistance from the court on this matter. See Docket No. 16.
Plaintiff is informed that he must respond to the motion to dismiss with an opposition or statement of non-opposition. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Plaintiff is further informed that a claim of retaliation unrelated to the acts alleged against defendants in this lawsuit must be brought in a separate action. Plaintiff does not name the prison officials who are allegedly withholding legal materials from him. As a general rule, this court is unable to issue an injunctive order against individuals who are not parties to the suit pending before it. See Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 110 (1969). Likewise, if the injury caused by the alleged deprivation of legal materials hinders plaintiff from pursuing a claim other than the ones alleged in this case, the deprivation and injury are not redressable in this case.
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion to dismiss or a statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.