Charles Windham v. Rodriguez et al

Filing 40

ORDER Requiring Plaintiff to File Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment 33 , signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 8/22/17. Thirty-Day Deadline. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10
11

CHARLES WINDHAM,
Plaintiff,

12
v.

13
14

C. RODRIGUEZ,
Defendant.

15
16
17
18
19

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00979-AWI-SAB (PC)
ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE
OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NONOPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
(ECF No. 33)
THIRTY (30) DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Charles Windham is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this
civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

20

On June 15, 2017, Defendant C. Rodriguez filed a motion for summary judgment under

21

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 for the failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (ECF No. 33)

22

Plaintiff was provided with notice of the requirements for opposing a motion for summary judgment.

23

Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2012); Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir. 1988);

24

Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 411–12 (9th Cir. 1988). (ECF No. 24-3.)

25

Plaintiff’s response was due within twenty-one (21) days of the date of service of Defendant’s

26

motion. That deadline has passed, but Plaintiff has not filed an opposition or statement of non-

27

opposition to the motion.

28

///
1

Pursuant to Local Rule 230(l), Plaintiff is HEREBY ORDERED to file an opposition or a

1
2

statement of non-opposition to Defendant’s motion within thirty (30) days.

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

Dated:

6

August 22, 2017
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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