Holifield v. Dohms et al

Filing 28

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge William E Duffin on 10/10/2019. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, by October 25, 2019, Holifield shall either respond to the defendants' motion for summary judgment or file a letter explaining why he is unable to do so. If the court does not hear from Holifield by that date, the court will grant the defendants' motion and dismiss this case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to stay the deadline for filing dispositive motions on the merits (ECF No. 27 ) is GRANTED. (cc: all counsel, plaintiff) (mlm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
AL HOLIFIELD,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 18-CV-807

CARMEN DOHMS, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER

Plaintiff Al Holifield, who is representing himself, filed a complaint under 42
U.S.C. § 1983. On August 16, 2019, the defendants filed a motion for summary
judgment on the ground that Holifield has not exhausted his administrative
remedies. (ECF No. 22.) Under Civil L.R. 56(b)(2), Holifield’s response materials were
due within thirty days of service of the motion. According to the court’s records, he
has not responded to the motion. Holifield’s failure to respond suggests that he does
not oppose the motion.
The court will give Holifield a final opportunity to file his response materials.
If he does not do so by the below deadline, the court will grant the motion and dismiss
the case with prejudice and without further notice to Holifield. See Civil L. R. 7(d)
(“Failure to file a memorandum in opposition to a motion is sufficient cause for the
Court to grant the motion.”); Civil L. R. 41(c) (“Whenever it appears to the Court that

the plaintiff is not diligently prosecuting the action . . . the Court may enter an order
of dismissal with or without prejudice.”).
As a reminder, if Holifield responds to the motion, he must respond to each of
the defendants’ proposed findings of fact by agreeing with each proposed fact or
explaining why he disagrees with a particular fact. If he does not indicate one way or
the other, the court will assume that he agrees with the proposed fact. Holifield must
support every disagreement with evidence. He can do that by relying on documents
or by telling the court his version of what happened in an affidavit or an unsworn
declaration under 28 U.S.C. § 1746.1 An unsworn declaration is a way for a party to
tell his side of the story while declaring to the court that everything in the declaration
is true and correct. Holifield must also respond to the legal arguments in the
defendants’ brief.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, by October 25, 2019, Holifield shall
either respond to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment or file a letter
explaining why he is unable to do so. If the court does not hear from Holifield by that
date, the court will grant the defendants’ motion and dismiss this case.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants’ motion to stay the deadline
for filing dispositive motions on the merits (ECF No. 27) is GRANTED.

 At the bottom of his declaration he should state: “I declare under penalty of perjury
that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on [date]. [Signature].” 28 U.S.C. §
1746(2).    
1

2 

Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 10th day of October, 2019.

WILLIAM E. DUFFIN
U.S. Magistrate Judge

3