Guillen v. Rocha
Filing
52
ORDER Providing Plaintiff Notice and Warning; Scheduling Supplemental Briefing. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 7/30/12. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/31/2012)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER ROCHA, et )
)
al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
MARCOS C. GUILLEN,
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
No. C 06-5176 RMW (PR)
ORDER PROVIDING
PLAINTIFF NOTICE AND
WARNING; SCHEDULING
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING
Plaintiff, a California prisoner pro se, filed this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. 1983.
18
Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment. Although given an opportunity, plaintiff
19
did not file an opposition. The case is now submitted for consideration. However, pursuant to
20
Woods v. Carey, No. 09-15548, slip op. 7871, 7884-85 (9th Cir. July 6, 2012), plaintiff must
21
read the following “NOTICE -- WARNING (SUMMARY JUDGMENT),” which is provided to
22
him for a second time pursuant to Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 953-954 (9th Cir. 1998) (en
23
banc), and Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 411-12 (9th Cir. 1988).
24
NOTICE -- WARNING
25
(SUMMARY JUDGMENT)
26
If defendants move for summary judgment, they are seeking to have your case dismissed.
27
A motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will, if
28
granted, end your case.
Order Providing Plaintiff Notice and Warning; Scheduling Supplemental Briefing
G:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\CR old\CR.06\Guillen176woods.wpd
1
Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a motion for summary judgment.
2
Generally, summary judgment must be granted when there is no genuine issue of material
3
fact--that is, if there is no real dispute about any fact that would affect the result of your case, the
4
party who asked for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, which will
5
end your case. When a party you are suing makes a motion for summary judgment that is
6
properly supported by declarations (or other sworn testimony), you cannot simply rely on what
7
your complaint says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in declarations, depositions, answers
8
to interrogatories, or authenticated documents, as provided in Rule 56(e), that contradict the facts
9
shown in the defendant's declarations and documents and show that there is a genuine issue of
10
material fact for trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in opposition, summary judgment,
11
if appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary judgment is granted, your case will be
12
dismissed and there will be no trial.
13
Although the deadline for plaintiff to file an opposition has already passed, in light of
14
Woods, plaintiff may file a supplemental opposition within 14 days of this order. Defendants
15
shall file a supplemental reply to any supplemental opposition within 7 days thereafter.
16
17
18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
RONALD M. WHYTE
United States District Judge
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order Providing Plaintiff Notice and Warning; Scheduling Supplemental Briefing
2
G:\PRO-SE\SJ.Rmw\CR old\CR.06\Guillen176woods.wpd
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MARCOS C. GUILLEN,
Case Number: CV06-05176 RMW
Plaintiff,
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
v.
ROCHA et al,
Defendant.
/
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District
Court, Northern District of California.
That on July 31, 2012, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said
copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing
said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery
receptacle located in the Clerk's office.
Marcos C Guillen K04517
Mule Creek State Prison
A5-210-Lower
Post Office Box 409020
Ione, CA 95640
Dated: July 31, 2012
Richard W. Wieking, Clerk
By: Jackie Lynn Garcia, Deputy Clerk
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?