Lopez v. Allison et al

Filing 28

SECOND INFORMATIONAL ORDER - Notice and Warning of Requirements for Opposing Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 26 ; ORDER Granting 27 Motion for Extension of Time to File Opposition, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 9/3/15. 60-Day Deadline. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ADAM LOPEZ,

12

Case No. 1:13-cv-02010-AWI-JLT
Plaintiff,

13

v.

14

SECOND INFORMATIONAL ORDER - NOTICE
AND WARNING OF REQUIREMENTS FOR
OPPOSING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO
DISMISS

ALLISON, et al.,
(Doc. 26)

15

Defendants.

16

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE OPPOSITION

17

(Doc. 27)

18

60-DAY DEADLINE

19

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this civil action. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on

20

August 18, 2015. Pursuant to Woods v. Carey, Nos. 09-15548, 09-16113, 2012 WL 262 6912

21

(9th Cir. 2012), Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2003), Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952

22

(9th Cir. 1998), and Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409 (9th Cir. 1988), the Court hereby

23

notifies Plaintiff of the following rights and requirements for opposing the motion:

24
25
26

1. Unless otherwise ordered, all motions to dismiss shall be briefed pursuant to Local
Rule 230(l).
2. Plaintiff is required to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to

27

Defendants' motion to dismiss. Local Rule 230(l). If Plaintiff fails to file an opposition or a

28

statement of non-opposition to the motion, this action may be dismissed, with prejudice, for
1

1

failure to prosecute. Local Rule requires the opposition, or statement of non-opposition be filed

2

not more than 21 days after the date of service of the motion. Id. However, Plaintiff filed a

3

motion requesting an extension of time1 and is granted 60 days from the service of this order to

4

file his opposition or statement of non-opposition.

5

3. In responding to Defendants' motion to dismiss, Plaintiff may not simply rely on

6

allegations in the operative complaint. Instead, Plaintiff must oppose the motion by setting forth

7

specific facts in declaration(s) and/or by submitting other evidence. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 43(c);

8

Ritza, 837 F.2d at 369. Generally, if a plaintiff does not submit his own evidence in opposition,

9

the Court may conclude that there is no evidence to oppose the motion and the case may be

10

dismissed in whole or in part. However, the majority of issues raised in Defendants' motion to

11

dismiss are legal and will not require submission of additional evidence.

12
13

4. Unsigned declarations will be stricken, and declarations not signed under penalty of
perjury have no evidentiary value and will not be considered.

14

5. The failure of any party to comply with this order, the Federal Rules of Civil

15

Procedure, or the Local Rules of the Eastern District of California may result in the imposition of

16

sanctions including but not limited to dismissal of the action or entry of default.

17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

19

September 3, 2015

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Though Plaintiff requested 90 days, he is being granted a 60 day extension of time. Sixty days should be more than
sufficient. However, due to the complex legal issues raised in Defendants' motion to dismiss, Plaintiff may request a
further extension if he feels it is necessary, which will be considered upon a showing of good cause.

2