Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02788/USCOURTS-caed-2_12-cv-02788-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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 

CHARLES CORTEMANCHE, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

B. MERRIWEATHER, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:12-cv-2788 AC P 

ORDER 

 On April 3, 2014 defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 18. When 

plaintiff initially failed to respond to the motion after more than thirty days, the court allowed an 

additional thirty days and cautioned the plaintiff that failure to oppose the motion may be deemed 

a waiver of opposition to the motion and would result in defendants’ asserted facts being deemed 

undisputed for purposes of resolving the motion. ECF No. 21. On June 5, 2014, plaintiff 

requested a thirty-day extension of time, ECF No. 22, which the court granted by order dated June 

13, 2014, ECF No. 23. Six months have passed and plaintiff has not filed an opposition. 

Nevertheless, the court now grants plaintiff one final opportunity to oppose defendants’ motion 

for summary judgment. 

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty-one days after the 

filing date of this order, plaintiff shall file and serve an opposition to the motion for summary 

Case 2:12-cv-02788-TLN-AC Document 24 Filed 01/26/15 Page 1 of 2
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 

2

judgment or a statement of non-opposition.1 Failure to comply with this order will result in the 

dismissal without prejudice of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 41(b). 

DATED: January 23, 2015 

 

1

 The requirements to oppose a motion for summary judgment are set forth in the court’s June 27, 

2013 order (ECF No. 11 at 4-5) as well as the Rand notice provided by defendants (ECF No. 18-

4). 

Case 2:12-cv-02788-TLN-AC Document 24 Filed 01/26/15 Page 2 of 2