UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 9, 2012
DR. CHEN, ET AL.,
ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NONv. OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT RESPONSE DUE WITHIN 21 DAYS
On April 19, 2010, Policarpio Medina ("Plaintiff"), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 1. On May 5, 2011, this Court found cognizable Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Chen, Mena, Shittu, and Lopez and a cognizable First Amendment retaliation claim, medical malpractice claim, and intentional infliction of emotional distress claim against Defendant Chen (collectively "Defendants"). Doc. 14.
On July 23, 2012, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment, contemporaneously with a notice as to how Plaintiff must oppose the motion in order to avoid dismissal, pursuant to Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998) and Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 936 (9th Cir. 2012). Doc. 32. As of the date of this order, Plaintiff has not filed an opposition or statement of non-opposition as required by Local Rule 230(l).
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff is to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment within twenty-one (21) days from the date of service of this order. Failure to timely comply or otherwise respond will be construed as waiver of the opportunity to file an opposition.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.