Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00836/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00836-13/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAAHDI COLEMAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

DERRAL G. ADAMS, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:06-cv-00836-AWI-GBC (PC) 

ORDER PROVIDING PLAINTIFF OPTION TO

(1) STAND ON EXISTING OPPOSITION TO

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR

(2) FILE AMENDED OPPOSITION PER

AMENDED SECOND INFORMATIONAL

ORDER

Docs. 70, 75

TWENTY-ONE DAY DEADLINE

I. Procedural History, Woods v. Carey, and Contemporaneous Notice

Plaintiff Saahdi Coleman (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 6, 2011, the Court issued a second informational

order, advising Plaintiff that Defendants may file a motion for summary judgment and how Plaintiff

must oppose the motion in order to avoid dismissal, pursuant to Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th

Cir. 1998). Doc. 24. On October 6, 2011, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Doc.

70. March 9, 2012, Plaintiff filed an opposition to the supplemental motion for summary judgment. 

Doc. 75; Doc. 76; Doc. 77; Doc. 79. On Mar 26, 2012, Defendants filed a reply. Doc. 82.

On July 6, 2012, the Ninth Circuit found that the notice and warning of requirements for

opposing a defendant’s motion for summary judgment should be issued contemporaneously when

a defendant files a motion for summary judgment, as opposed to a year or more in advance. Woods

v. Carey, --- F.3d ---, 2012 WL 2626912, at * 4 (9th Cir. Jul. 6, 2012). In order to address the time

delay between providing notice and the filing of Defendants’ motion, the Court issued an amended

second informational order to Plaintiff, in accordance with Woods.

II. Plaintiff has Option to (1) Stand on Existing Opposition to Motion for Summary

Judgment or (2) File Amended Opposition Per Amended Second Informational Order

In light of the separately-issued amended second informational order and notice pursuant to

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:06-cv-00836-AWI-SAB Document 87 Filed 08/08/12 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

Woods, the Court will provide Plaintiff with two options upon receipt of the notice and this order.

Plaintiff may either (1) stand on his previously-filed opposition or (2) withdraw the existing

opposition and file an amended opposition.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within twenty-one (21) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff may

elect to:

a. Stand on his existing opposition already submitted to the Court; or 

b. Withdraw his opposition and file an amended opposition;

2. If Plaintiff does not elect to file an amended opposition in response to this order

within twenty-one (21) days, the Court will consider his existing opposition in

resolving Defendants’ motion for summary judgment;

3. If Plaintiff elects to file an amended opposition, the Court will not consider

Defendants’ existing reply; and 

4. Defendants may file an amended reply pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: August 7, 2012 

0jh02o UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Page 2 of 2

Case 1:06-cv-00836-AWI-SAB Document 87 Filed 08/08/12 Page 2 of 2