DeVon v. Diaz et al
Filing
47
ORDER DIRECTING Clerk to Re-Serve [36-1] Second Informational Order with RAND NOTICE on Plaintiff signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 7/9/2012. (Sant Agata, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
ALAN DeVON,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
DIAZ, et al.,
)
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)
1:07-cv-01727-AWI-GSA-PC
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO RESERVE SECOND INFORMATIONAL
ORDER WITH RAND NOTICE ON
PLAINTIFF
(Doc. 36-1.)
17
Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983.
18
On October 18, 2011, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss this action for Plaintiff's failure to exhaust
19
administrative remedies. (Doc. 41.) By this motion, Defendants seek to dismiss this action in its
20
entirety.
21
On July 19, 2011, the Court issued the Second Informational Order, Motion to Dismiss Notice,
22
and Summary Judgment Notice in this action, providing Plaintiff with notice pursuant to Rand v.
23
Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998), advising Plaintiff of his rights and responsibilities to oppose a
24
motion to dismiss such as that filed by Defendants in this action. (Doc. 36-1.) At this juncture, Plaintiff
25
shall be provided with another copy of the Order/Notice. Woods v. Carey, No. 09-15548, 09-16113,
26
2012 WL 2626912 (9th Cir. July 6, 2012). Plaintiff is advised to immediately review the Order/Notice
27
in its entirety for information pertaining to his opposition to Defendants' pending motion to dismiss.
28
///
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve another copy of the Second
2
Informational Order, Motion to Dismiss Notice and Summary Judgment Notice (Doc. 36-1) upon
3
Plaintiff, for his review.
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
Dated:
6i0kij
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
July 9, 2012
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?