UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 25, 2012
R. J. WILLIAMS, ET AL.,
ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 58) TWENTY-DAY DEADLINE
I. Procedural History
Plaintiff Thornell Brown ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis ("IFP") in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff's complaint, filed May 4, 2009, against Defendants Williams and Gonzales ("Defendants") for use of excessive force and subjecting Plaintiff to unconstitutional conditions of confinement following the use of force on May 23, 2005, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. Doc. 1 (Complaint); Doc. 8 (Cog. Claim Ord.).
On March 29, 2012, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Doc. 58. As explained in the Court's second informational order filed on January 12, 2010 (Doc. 10-1), Plaintiff was required to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion within twenty-one days, but has not done so. Local Rule 78-230(m). As warned in its January 12, 2010, order: "the Court may consider plaintiffs failure to act as a waiver of opposition to defendant(s) motion. Plaintiff's waiver of opposition to defendant(s)' motion may result in the entry of summary judgment against plaintiff." Doc. 10-1.
Accordingly, within twenty (20) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff must file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the Defendants' motion for summary judgment or the case will be dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.