Robinson v. Adams, et al.

Filing 136

ORDER Requiring Defendants to Respond to Plaintiff's 132 and 135 Motion for Sanctions, signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 05/03/2012. (30 Day Deadline) (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

GEORGE H. ROBINSON,

10
11
12

CASE NO. 1:08-cv-01380-AWI-BAM PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO
RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS FOR
SANCTIONS

v.
D. ADAMS, et al.,

13

(ECF Nos. 132, 135)
Defendants.

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE
/

14
15

On March 16, 2012, an order issued granting Defendants’ motion for a protective order and

16

ordering Defendants to serve responsive documents within thirty days. (ECF No. 130.) On April

17

4, 2012, and May 2, 2012, Plaintiff filed motions for sanctions stating that Defendants have not

18

complied with the order and no discovery has been served. Defendants failed to file an opposition

19

or a statement of non-opposition to the motion filed April 4, 2012. Local Rule 230(l).

20

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

21

1.

Defendants shall file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Plaintiff’s

22

motions for sanctions within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order;

23

and

24

2.

25
26
27

The failure to respond to Plaintiff’s motions in compliance with this order may result
in the imposition of sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
cm411

May 3, 2012

/s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28
1