Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01426/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01426-3/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

EDDIE HARRIS,

Plaintiff,

v.

HASKY, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:12-cv-01426-LJO-SKO (PC)

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE 

OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NONOPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(Doc. 29)

Plaintiff Eddie Harris (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on August 30, 2012. This 

action is proceeding on Plaintiff’s amended complaint against Defendants Hasky and Beltran 

(“Defendants”) for endangering Plaintiff’s safety, in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the 

United States Constitution.

On May 8, 2014, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust 

the administrative remedies.

1

 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a); Albino v. Baca, __ F.3d 

__, __, No. 10-55702, 2014 WL 1317141 (9th Cir. Apr. 3, 2014) (en banc) (failure to exhaust 

should be raised in a summary judgment motion). Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

///

 

1 The motion was accompanied by the requisite contemporaneous notice of the requirements for opposing a motion for 

summary judgment. Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 938-41 (9th Cir. 2012).

Case 1:12-cv-01426-LJO-SKO Document 30 Filed 05/12/14 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

1. Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of this order, Plaintiff shall file an 

opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion; and

2. If Plaintiff fails to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition, this 

action will be dismissed for failure to obey a court order and failure to 

prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 12, 2014 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-01426-LJO-SKO Document 30 Filed 05/12/14 Page 2 of 2