UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 19, 2012
RAHN G. THOMPSON,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary S. Austin United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER RESPONDING TO REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION (Doc. 79.) TWENTY DAY DEADLINE TO EITHER: (1) FILE AMENDED OPPOSITION, OR (2) DO NOTHING -- AND CASE WILL PROCEED WITH PREVIOUSLY-FILED OPPOSITION
On September 4, 2012, Plaintiff filed a document titled "Plaintiff In This Case Is Dumbfound [sic] of What To Do Now," expressing indecision about how to respond to the Court's order of August 23, 2012. (Doc. 79.) The Court shall endeavor to clarify Plaintiff's choices in a few words.
The purpose of the Court's order of August 23, 2012 was to provide Plaintiff with information about his rights and responsibilities in opposing Defendants' motion to dismiss. Plaintiff is advised to review the order again and decide whether he wishes to file a new opposition to the motion to dismiss.
Plaintiff has two choices:
(1) File an amended opposition to the motion to dismiss within twenty days from the date of service of this order, or
(2) Do nothing -- and the case will proceed with Plaintiff's opposition previously filed on November 21, 2011.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.