(PC) Brooks v. Arrizola et al

Filing 37

ORDER REQUIRING Plaintiff to File Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to Defendant Arrezola's Motion for Summary Judgment Within THIRTY Days, signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 9/15/2022. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 LAMAR BROOKS, Plaintiff, 9 10 11 vs. ARRIZOLA, et al., Defendants. 12 1:20-cv-00476-JLT-GSA-PC ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NONOPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT ARREZOLA’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITHIN THIRTY DAYS (ECF No. 36.) 13 14 15 16 17 18 Lamar Brooks (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 17, 2022, Defendant Arrezola filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 36.) Plaintiff was required to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion within twenty-one days, but has not done so. Local Rule 230(l). 19 Accordingly, within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff must 20 file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. 21 If Plaintiff fails to comply with this order this action may be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure 22 to obey the Court’s order and failure to prosecute. 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: September 15, 2022 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

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?