Mayfield v. Mix et al
Filing
68
Notice To Plaintiff Regarding Defendants' Motion For Summary Judgment; ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 2/14/2014. (Replies due by 3/11/2014) (Fahrney, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
DWAYNE MAYFIELD,
1:10cv01091 AWI DLB PC
10
Plaintiff,
11
v.
NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF
REGARDING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
12
M. MIX, et al.,
13
Defendants.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Plaintiff Dwayne Mayfield (“Plaintiff”) is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this
civil rights action filed on June 16, 2010. This action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s complaint for
violation of the Eighth Amendment against Defendants E. Mason and M. Mix.
On December 27, 2013, Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants also
provided Plaintiff with the requirements for opposing a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to
Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir. 1998).
As of the date of this order, Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. Plaintiff is warned that if
he does not oppose the motion within twenty-one (21) days of the date of service of this order, the
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
1
motion will be decided without the benefit of any arguments he may have. If summary judgment is
2
granted in favor of Defendants, judgment will be entered for Defendants and the action will be
3
closed.
4
5
IT IS SO ORDERED.
6
7
8
Dated:
/s/ Dennis
February 14, 2014
L. Beck
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DEAC_Signature-END:
3b142a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?