Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01008/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-01008-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID L. HOLCOMB, SR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

PFIZER, INC.,

Defendant.

No. 1:20-cv-1008-KJM-KJN (PS)

ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO RESPOND TO 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

This case was recently reassigned to the Sacramento division of the Eastern District of 

California; it was then referred to the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21) given that 

plaintiff proceeds without counsel. (ECF Nos. 68, 71.) Defendant currently has a motion to 

dismiss pending, which was taken under submission by the former district judge. (ECF Nos. 58, 

61.) Plaintiff did not file opposition to this motion. (See ECF No. 62.) In the interests of justice, 

plaintiff is provided one final opportunity to respond to defendant’s motion. This is due by 

October 18, 2023. Should plaintiff oppose, defendant may submit a reply brief within 10 days of

plaintiff’s filing. Thereafter, the court will resolve the motion on the written briefing. See Local 

Rule 230(c) (noting that a party loses its right to a hearing if timely opposition is not filed, as well 

as that a failure to file a response may be construed as non-opposition to the motion).

Dated: September 27, 2023

holc.1008

Case 1:20-cv-01008-KJM-KJN Document 72 Filed 09/28/23 Page 1 of 1