Brent Adler v. Gonzalez et al

Filing 37

ORDER Requiring Plaintiff to File Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 5/5/16. 21-Day Deadline. (Verduzco, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9
10
11
12
13

1:13-cv-01867-LJO-SKO (PC)

ADLER,
Plaintiff,

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE
OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NONOPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

v.
GONZALES, et al,

(Doc. 34)

Defendants.

TWENTY-ONE (21) DAY DEADLINE

14
15
16

Plaintiff Brent Adler, a former state prisoner who is proceeding pro se and in forma

17

pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on November 18, 2013. This

18

action for damages is proceeding against Defendants Gonzalez, Holland, Steadman, Bryant,

19

Zanchi, Lundy, and Schuyler for violating Plaintiff’s right to adequate outdoor exercise under the

20

Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution while he was incarcerated at California

21

Correctional Institution in Tehachapi between 2008 and 2011.

22

On March 30, 2016, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment which included

23

notice to Plaintiff of the requirements to oppose the motion. (Doc. 34.) Further, on March 31,

24

2016, the Second Informational Order issued which also informed Plaintiff of the requirements to

25

adequately oppose a motion for summary judgment in detail and that his opposition or statement

26

of non-opposition was due within 21 days of service of Defendants’ motion. (Doc. 36.) Plaintiff

27

has not filed an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion despite lapse of more

28

than the requisite time. Local Rule 230(l).
1

1

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

Plaintiff shall file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion
within twenty-one (21) days from the date of service of this order; and

3
2.

4

Plaintiff is warned that the failure to comply with this order will result

5

recommendation that this action be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to

6

prosecute and for failure to obey a court order.

7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
8
9

Dated:

May 5, 2016

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2