Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gregory Lynn Norwood v. Separately-Cate

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


October 19, 2012

GREGORY LYNN NORWOOD, PLAINTIFF,
v.
SEPARATELY-CATE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

ORDER PERMITTING PLAINTIFF OPPORTUNITY TO WITHDRAW ISSUED SUMMARY JUDGMENT NOTICE OPPOSITION AND FILE AMENDED OPPOSITION IN LIGHT OF THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE (Docs. 51, 74)

Plaintiff Gregory Lynn Norwood ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 10.) Upon screening, the Court found that Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, filed on August 14, 2009, stated an Eighth Amendment claim against Defendants Kenneth Clark, K. Allison, T. P. Wan, J. Reynoso and W. J. Sullivan, stemming from their involvement with the prison's race-based lockdowns, which deprived Plaintiff of outdoor exercise. (Docs. 11, 15, 17, 19, 20.)

Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 45.) Plaintiff filed an opposition to which Defendants replied. (Docs. 51, 58.) The motion was submitted under Local Rule 230(l).

In light of the recent decision in Woods v. Carey, Nos. 09-15548, 09-16113, 2012 WL 2626912, at *5 (9th Cir. Jul. 6, 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 some two years prior does not suffice. In bringing their motion, Defendants notified Plaintiff of the cases in which he would find the law governing his obligations but that, too, does not suffice. Id.

By separate order issued concurrently with this order, the Court provides the requisite notice. The Court will not consider multiple oppositions, however, Plaintiff has two options upon receipt of the notice and this order. Plaintiff may either (1) stand on his previously-filed opposition or (2) withdraw it and file an amended opposition.*fn1

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff may, within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, withdraw his opposition and file an amended opposition;

2. If Plaintiff does not file an amended opposition in response to this order, his existing opposition will be considered in resolving Defendants' motion for summary judgment; and

3. If Plaintiff elects to file an amended opposition, Defendants' existing reply will not be considered and they may file an amended reply pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.