Garcia v. Rosario et al

Filing 61

NOTICE TO PRO SE LITIGANT and ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R. Underhill on 8/7/2013. (Oliver, T.)

Download PDF
Garcia v. Rosario et al Doc. 61 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRUCE J. GARCIA v. ROSARIO, ET AL. : : : : : : 3:10cv795 (SRU) NOTICE TO PRO SE LITIGANT AND ORDER On May 3, 2013, the defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. The plaintiff has failed to file opposition to such motion within 21 days, as required under Rule 7(a)1, Loc. R. Civ. P. (D. Conn.). The court hereby gives express notice to the pro se plaintiff that failure to submit a memorandum in opposition or failure to submit evidence contradicting the defendant’s version of the facts, may be deemed sufficient cause to grant the motion. See Rule 7(a)1, Loc. R. Civ. P. (D. Conn.). If no opposition is filed within fourteen (14) days of this notice, the defendants’ motion shall be granted and the case shall be dismissed. See generally Ruotolo v. IRS, 28 F.3d 6, 8 (2d Cir. 1994)(court has obligation to make certain that pro se litigants are aware of the local rules and understand the consequences of the failure to comply with such rules). SO ORDERED this 7th day of August 2013 at Bridgeport, Connecticut. /s/ Stefan R. Underhill Stefan R. Underhill United States District 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?