IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 16, 2011
ELBERT LEE VAUGHT, IV, PLAINTIFF,
E. SANDOVAL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
On February 10, 2011, defendant filed a motion to revoke plaintiff's in forma pauperis status and motion to dismiss. 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 . . . ." On September 22, 2010, 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.
The remedy for a finding that plaintiff's in forma pauperis status should be revoked is an order requiring plaintiff to pay the filing fee.
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any, to defendant's motion to revoke his in forma pauperis status. Failure to file an opposition will be deemed as a statement of non-opposition and will result in an order requiring him to pay the filing fee.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.