Shepard v. Quillen

Filing 18

ORDER REQUIRING Plaintiff to File Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to Defendant's 13 MOTION to DISMISS; Response due Within 30 Days signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 6/22/2010. Filing Deadline: 7/26/2010.(Bradley, A)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff Lamont Shepard ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 16, 2010, Defendant Quillen filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that Plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim. (Doc. #13.) Plaintiff has not filed an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion to dismiss. Local Rule 230(l) requires Plaintiff to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Defendant's motion within twenty-one (21) days of the date of service of the motion. Instead, Plaintiff has filed a request for entry of default claiming that Defendant "has failed to answer or otherwise defend as to Plaintiffs'[sic] complaint". (Doc. #17.) Plaintiff is advised that Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss. Thus, Defendant has not defaulted. It is Plaintiff who has failed to respond to Defendant's motion. The Court will provide Plaintiff with thirty (30) days to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Defendant's motion to dismiss. /// 1 v. T. QUILLEN, RESPONSE DUE WITHIN 30 DAYS Defendant. / LAMONT SHEPARD, Plaintiff, CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00809-SKO PC ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NONOPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty (30) days of the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Defendant's motion to dismiss. Plaintiff's failure to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition in compliance with this order may result in this action being dismissed.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: ie14hj June 22, 2010 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2