UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 15, 2012
LYDIA C. HENSE, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION (ECF No. 46) RESPONSE DUE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS
Plaintiff John Allen ("Plaintiff") is a prisoner in the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation ("CDCR"). Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds against Defendant M. Hicks for 9 violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment and against Defendant J. Lopez for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment and deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment. On May 3, 2012, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Pending before the Court is Defendants' motion, filed July 25, 2012, to grant Plaintiff additional time to file an opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 46.
In light of the recent decision in Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 2012), Plaintiff must be provided with "fair notice" of the requirements for opposing a motion for summary judgment at the time the motion is brought, and the notice given in this case over a year prior does not suffice. Defendants provide notice pursuant to Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 962-63 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc) in their pending motion. Defs.' Mot. 2:4-3:6, ECF No. 46.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff is to file, within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, an opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment;
2. Failure to file an opposition will result in waiver of the opportunity to file an opposition; and
3. Defendants may file a reply within fourteen (14) days from the date of service of Plaintiff's opposition.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.