Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_02-cv-05429/USCOURTS-cand-5_02-cv-05429-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

Order Directing Clerk to Reissue Summons

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\CR.02\Lara05429_re svc1.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSE LUIS LARA,

Plaintiff,

 vs.

DR. POSNER, et al., 

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 02-05429 JW (PR)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK TO

REISSUE SUMMONS AS TO

DEFENDANT DR. POSNER

Plaintiff, a California inmate proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights

complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging deliberate indifference to his serious

medical needs by Salinas Valley State Prison (“SVSP”) employees. The Court

ordered service of plaintiff’s amended complaint upon defendants Dr. Posner and

Dr. Haffner at SVSP, and upon defendant Willis at the address provided by the

Litigation Coordinator. Summons was reissued as to defendant Dr, Posner on

February 10, 2009, at Corcoran State Prison but the Court has not received any

confirmation that summons was executed on this defendant. In the interest of

justice, the Court shall re-issue summons to defendant Posner. 

///

///

Case 5:02-cv-05429-EJD Document 76 Filed 03/26/10 Page 1 of 5
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

Order Directing Clerk to Reissue Summons

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\CR.02\Lara05429_re svc1.wpd 2

CONCLUSION

It is hereby ordered as follows: 

1. The clerk shall re-issue a summons and the United States Marshal 

shall serve, without prepayment of fees, a copy of the amended complaint in this

matter (Docket No. 12), all attachments thereto, a copy of the Court’s order filed

November 9, 2006, (Docket No. 17), and a copy of this order to defendant Dr.

David Posner at Corcoran State Prison. 

2. In order to expedite the resolution of this case;

a. Defendant shall, within sixty (60) days from the date he is 

served with the amended complaint or from the date defendant’s counsel files an

appearance on their behalf, file a motion for summary judgment or other dispositive

motion, or shall notify the Court that he is of the opinion that this case cannot be

resolved by such a motion. The motion shall be supported by adequate factual

documentation and shall conform in all respects to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

56. 

Defendant is advised that summary judgment cannot be granted, nor qualified 

immunity found, if material facts are in dispute. If defendant is of the opinion that

this case cannot be resolved by summary judgment, he shall so inform the Court

prior to the date the summary judgment motion is due. 

All papers filed with the Court shall be served promptly on plaintiff.

b. Plaintiff’s opposition to the dispositive motion shall be filed with

the Court and served on defendant’s counsel not later than thirty (30) days from the

date defendants’ motion is filed. The Ninth Circuit has held that the following

notice should be given to pro se plaintiffs:

The defendants have made a motion for summary judgment by which

they seek to have your case dismissed. A motion for summary

judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will,

if granted, end your case. 

Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a motion for

summary judgment. Generally, summary judgment must be granted

Case 5:02-cv-05429-EJD Document 76 Filed 03/26/10 Page 2 of 5
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

Order Directing Clerk to Reissue Summons

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\CR.02\Lara05429_re svc1.wpd 3

when there is no genuine issue of material fact--that is, if there is no

real dispute about any fact that would affect the result of your case, the

party who asked for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a

matter of law, which will end your case. When a party you are suing

makes a motion for summary judgment that is properly supported by

declarations (or other sworn testimony), you cannot simply rely on

what your complaint says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in

declarations, depositions, answers to interrogatories, or authenticated

documents, as provided in Rule 56(e), that contradict the facts shown

in the defendant's declarations and documents and show that there is a

genuine issue of material fact for trial. If you do not submit your own

evidence in opposition, summary judgment, if appropriate, may be

entered against you. If summary judgment is granted in favor of

defendants, your case will be dismissed and there will be no trial.

See Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 963 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc).

Plaintiff is advised to read Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

and Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S. Ct. 2548, 91 L. Ed. 2d 265 (1986)

(holding party opposing summary judgment must come forward with evidence

showing triable issues of material fact on every essential element of his claim). 

Plaintiff is cautioned that failure to file an opposition to defendants’ motion for

summary judgment may be deemed to be a consent by plaintiff to the granting of the

motion, and granting of judgment against plaintiff without a trial. See Ghazali v.

Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53-54 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam); Brydges v. Lewis, 18 F.3d

651, 653 (9th Cir. 1994). 

c. Defendant may file a reply brief no later than fifteen (15) days after

plaintiff’s opposition is filed. 

d. The motion shall be deemed submitted as of the date the reply brief

is due. No hearing will be held on the motion unless the Court so orders at a later

date. 

3. Discovery may be taken in accordance with the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure. No further Court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(a)(2) or

Local Rule 16-1 is required before the parties may conduct discovery.

4. All communications by plaintiff with the Court must be served on 

defendants’ counsel once counsel has been designated, by mailing a true copy of the

Case 5:02-cv-05429-EJD Document 76 Filed 03/26/10 Page 3 of 5
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

Order Directing Clerk to Reissue Summons

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\CR.02\Lara05429_re svc1.wpd 4

document to defendant’s counsel.

5. It is plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Plaintiff must 

keep the Court and the parties informed of any change of address and must comply

with the Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the

dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 41(b).

DATED: 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge 

March 25, 2010 

Case 5:02-cv-05429-EJD Document 76 Filed 03/26/10 Page 4 of 5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSE LUIS LARA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

DR. POSNER, et al.,

Defendants. /

Case Number: CV02-05429 JW 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on , I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the

attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s)

hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into

an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Jose Luis Lara

1676 Spooner Dr.

San Luis Obispo, CA 93405

Dated: 

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Elizabeth Garcia, Deputy Clerk

3/26/2010 3/26/2010 /s/

Case 5:02-cv-05429-EJD Document 76 Filed 03/26/10 Page 5 of 5