ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO FILE UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION (Doc. 54; Doc. 55)
ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 81)
Plaintiff Monte Haney ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on July 5, 2007. Doc. 1. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff's first amended complaint filed on July 16, 2008, for: 1) excessive force on December 14, 2006, in violation of the Eighth Amendment by defendants J.G. Oaks and D. Silva; 2) deprivation of outdoor exercise from December 15, 2006 to March 15, 2007, in violation of the Eighth Amendment by defendants R. Botello, M. Rickman, F. Oliver, G. Torres, T. Cano; and 3) deprivation of outdoor exercise of African-American inmates in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment equal protection clause by defendants R. Botello, M. Rickman, F. Oliver, G. Torres, T. Cano. Doc. 22; Doc. 28; Doc. 32.
On June 21, 2011, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Doc. 54; Doc. 55. On January 4, 2012, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition within thirty days of service. Doc. 81.
Although Defendants attached exhibits to their motion for summary judgment and referenced "Defendants' Undisputed Facts" ("DUF") in their motion for summary judgment, it does not appear that Defendants have provided the Court or Plaintiff with the DUF. Doc. 54; Doc. 55. According to Local Rule 260(a):
Each motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication shall be accompanied by a "Statement of Undisputed Facts" that shall enumerate discretely each of the specific material facts relied upon in support of the motion and cite the particular portions of any pleading, affidavit, deposition, interrogatory answer, admission, or other document relied upon to establish that fact. The moving party shall be responsible for the filing of all evidentiary documents cited in the moving papers.
Therefore, Defendants are HEREBY ORDERED to submit a DUF to the Court and to Plaintiff within FIFTEEN (15) days from service of this order. Accordingly, the time in which Plaintiff has to oppose Defendants' motion to dismiss is extended to FORTY-FIVE (45) days from service of this order.