Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_03-cv-00047/USCOURTS-cand-4_03-cv-00047-1/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARREN BROWNE, aka AARON

BROWNE,

Plaintiff(s), No. C 03-0047 PJH

v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

SAN FRANCISCO SHERIFFS 

DEPARTMENT, et al.,

Defendant(s).

_______________________________/

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment was filed on April 9, 2007. Plaintiff’s

opposition was filed on June 28, 2007, but apparently not served on any of the defendants. 

Before the court is defendants’ reply and motion to strike plaintiff’s opposition for his failure

to serve it as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(a), which requires parties to

serve on all other parties every pleading or motion filed in the case subsequent to the

original complaint.

In order to determine if defendants’ motion should be granted or denied, it would

assist the court to know why plaintiff did not serve the motion on defendants and whether

plaintiff understands his responsibility to serve every paper that he files with the court on

the opposing parties or their counsel. The court refers plaintiff to its earlier order of

December 11, 2006, in which the court advised plaintiff of this requirement and specifically

ordered him to file his opposition to the summary judgment motion and to serve it upon

defendants, within thirty days of his receipt of the motion.

Case 4:03-cv-00047-PJH Document 67 Filed 10/23/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Accordingly, plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why his opposition to

defendants’ motion should not be stricken. Plaintiff’s written response must be filed with

the court and served upon defendants no later than November 5, 2007. Failure to respond

will result in the court striking the opposition, or dismissing the case for failure to prosecute,

or other appropriate sanction.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 23, 2007 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:03-cv-00047-PJH Document 67 Filed 10/23/07 Page 2 of 2