Eason v. Wal-Mart Corporation
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 6/26/17 ORDERING that the Order to Show Cause is withdrawn; Defendant shall forthwith service plaintiff with a copy of this Order and a copy of the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and not ify the court through ECF the date thedocuments were mailed; The Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the date that defendant's service is postmarked to Oppose defendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; The court will renotice the hearing on the motion, if necessary, upon receipt of the Opposition. (Becknal, R)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RAYMELL LAMAR EASON,
No. 2:16-cv-1876 KJM GGH
WALMART STORES, INC.,
Plaintiff acting in pro se and in forma pauperis sues defendant for alleged civil rights
violations. ECF Nos. 1, 7. On March 28, 2017 defendant filed and served a Motion for Judgment
on the Pleadings and set a hearing before District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller for June 16, 2017.
ECF No. 36. On the same date Judge Mueller’s Courtroom deputy served a Minute Order
labeling the motion as defective insofar as based on Eastern District of California Local Rules
302(c)(21) the Motion should have been calendared before the undersigned Magistrate Judge.
ECF No. 37. On March 29, 2017 defendant renoticed the hearing before this court to be heard on
June 15, 2017 at 9:00 a.m. ECF No. 38. Pursuant to Local Rule 230(c) any Opposition or a
Statement of Non-Opposition from plaintiff was thereby due to be filed no later than June 1,
2017. No Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition having been received, this court issued an
Order to Show Cause why the matter should not be dismissed on the ground that the Motion was
unopposed in violation of court rules but permitted plaintiff to simultaneously file an Opposition
within fourteen (14) days of the issuance of the Order.
On June 15, 2017 plaintiff responded to the Order and opined that the matter having been
vacated from Judge Mueller’s calendar and no new motion having been noticed he had no duty to
respond. Since it is possible, given the fact that plaintiff is incarcerated in the U. S. Penitentiary
at Lompoc plaintiff never received the renoticing document.1
In light of the foregoing IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
The Order to Show Cause is withdrawn;
Defendant shall forthwith service plaintiff with a copy of this Order and a copy of
the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and notify the court through ECF the date the
documents were mailed;
postmarked to Oppose defendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings;
The court will renotice the hearing on the motion, if necessary, upon receipt of the
The Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the date that defendant’s service is
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 26, 2017
/s/ Gregory G. Hollows
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Defendant is hereby informed that service on an incarcerated party does not reach that party
through the ECF system and any future documents filed by defendant must be mailed to plaintiff
by defendant at the address reflected on the Civil Docket for this case. E.D. Cal. LR 135.
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?