Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00269/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00269-31/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff Vincent C. Bruce (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds on Plaintiff’s 

claims against (1) Defendants Adams, Hense, Ward, Clark, Fulks, Wan, Frauenheim, Lloren, Fields 

and Tripp for retaliation in violation of the First Amendment; (2) Defendants Adams, Hense, Ward, 

Clark, Fulks, Wan, Lloren, Fields and Tripp for violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth 

Amendment; and (3) Defendants Adams, Schottgen and Fields for failing to provide Plaintiff with 

adequate clothing in violation of the Eighth Amendment. 

On March 17, 2014, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff has been 

granted several extensions of time to file an opposition to the motion for summary judgment. Most 

recently, on December 3, 2014, the Court granted Plaintiff a thirty day extension of time to file a 

response to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 184.) Plaintiff’s response was due 

VINCENT C. BRUCE,

 Plaintiff,

v.

JEANNE WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:07-cv-00269-BAM PC

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION 

SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE 

TO PROSECUTE OR DEFENDANTS= MOTION 

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SHOULD NOT BE 

GRANTED FOR PLAINTIFF=S FAILURE TO FILE 

OPPOSITION

TWENTY-ONE DAY DEADLINE

Case 1:07-cv-00269-BAM Document 186 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 2
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

on or before January 5, 2015. Plaintiff has failed to file a timely opposition or a statement of nonopposition to the motion for summary judgment. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, if any he has, why this action should 

not be dismissed for failure to prosecute or why summary judgment should not be granted in favor of 

Defendants. Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a written response to this Order to Show Cause within 

twenty-one (21) days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff may comply with this order by filing his 

opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion for summary judgment. 

Failure to respond to this Order to Show Cause may result in dismissal of this action for failure 

to prosecute or in summary judgment in favor of Defendants due to Plaintiff’s failure to identify a 

genuine dispute as to any material fact. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 12, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00269-BAM Document 186 Filed 01/12/15 Page 2 of 2