Polk v. Lattimore et al
Filing
148
ORDER clarifying deadline to file Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment 147 signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 8/2/2021. Filing Deadline: 8/16/2021. (Lundstrom, T)
Case 1:12-cv-01156-DAD-BAM Document 148 Filed 08/02/21 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
SUSAN MAE POLK,
12
13
14
15
Plaintiff,
v.
LATTIMORE, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 1:12-cv-01156-DAD-BAM (PC)
ORDER CLARIFYING DEADLINE TO FILE
PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
(ECF No. 147)
Opposition Due: August 16, 2021
16
17
18
Plaintiff Susan Mae Polk (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
19
pauperis in this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s
20
fifth amended complaint against Defendant Baron for retaliation in violation of the First
21
Amendment and deliberate indifference in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
22
On July 23, 2021, Defendant Baron filed a motion for summary judgment for failure to
23
exhaust administrative remedies. (ECF No. 147.) In that motion, Defendant incorrectly states
24
that Plaintiff’s written opposition to the summary judgment motion “must be filed not more than
25
fourteen days after the date of service of the motion.” (Id. at 2.)
26
By the instant order, the Court clarifies that pursuant to Local Rule 230(l), Plaintiff’s
27
opposition to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment shall be served and filed “not more
28
than twenty-one (21) days after the date of service of the motion.” Local Rule 230(l)
1
Case 1:12-cv-01156-DAD-BAM Document 148 Filed 08/02/21 Page 2 of 2
1
(emphasis added). In addition, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(d), Plaintiff is
2
allowed an additional three (3) days following service made by mail. Finally, pursuant to the
3
prison mailbox rule, a pleading filed by a pro se prisoner is deemed to be filed as of the date the
4
prisoner delivered it to the prison authorities for mailing to the court clerk. See Houston v. Lack,
5
487 U.S. 266, 270 (1988); Douglas v. Noelle, 567 F.3d 1103, 1108–09 (9th Cir. 2009) (mailbox
6
rule articulated in Houston applies to civil rights actions).
7
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant’s
8
motion for summary judgment is due on or before August 16, 2021. Plaintiff is further warned
9
that failure to file an opposition in compliance with the Court’s order will result in dismissal
10
of this action, with prejudice, for failure to prosecute.
11
12
13
14
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Barbara
August 2, 2021
A. McAuliffe
_
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?