Chavez v. Carlos, et al

Filing 25

ORDER Requiring Defendants to RE-SERVE 23 MOTION to DISMISS on Plaintiff at His Address of Record and File Amended Proof of Service Within Ten Days, and Requiring Plaintiff to File Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to Motion Within Thirty Days of Service, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 8/31/2011. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

CARLOS CHAVEZ,

10
11
12

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00744-AWI-SKO PC
Plaintiff,

ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO RESERVE MOTION TO DISMISS ON
PLAINTIFF AT HIS ADDRESS OF RECORD
AND FILE AMENDED PROOF OF SERVICE
WITHIN TEN DAYS, AND REQUIRING
PLAINTIFF TO FILE OPPOSITION OR
STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION TO
MOTION WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF
SERVICE

v.
SGT. CARLOS, et al.,

13

Defendants.

14
15

(Doc. 23)
/

16
17

Plaintiff Carlos Chavez, a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,

18

filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on April 21, 2009. On July 27, 2011,

19

Defendants Chatman and Gonzales filed a motion to dismiss. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). More than

20

twenty-one days have passed and Plaintiff has not responded to the motion.1 Local Rule 230(l). The

21

Court notes, however, that Defendants served their motion on Plaintiff in care of his parole agent

22

rather than at his address of record in this action.

23

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

24

1.

Within ten (10) days from the date of service of this order, Defendants shall re-serve

25

their motion to dismiss on Plaintiff at his address of record in this action and file an

26

amended proof of service;

27
1

28

In accordance with the Court’s general practice, Local Rule 230(l) shall continue to govern motion
practice in this action, despite Plaintiff’s release from prison.

1

1

2.

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

2

motion to dismiss within thirty (30) days from the date of re-service of the motion;

3

and

4

3.

If Plaintiff fails to file a response to Defendants’ motion in compliance with this

5

order, this action will be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to obey a court order

6

and failure to prosecute.

7
8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11

Dated:
ie14hj

August 31, 2011

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2