Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-01928/USCOURTS-caed-2_10-cv-01928-11/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEON GRAY,

Plaintiff, No. 2:10-cv-1928 GEB EFB P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPT. OF

CORRECTIONS ANS

REHABILITATION, et al., ORDER AND

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Defendants. 

 /

This case, in which plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, is before the

undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(17). See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1). Defendant Dage moves for summary judgment and has noticed the motion to be

heard on February 20, 2013. Dckt. No. 62.

Court records reflect that plaintiff has filed neither an opposition nor a statement of

non-opposition to the motion for summary judgment. Local Rule 230(c) provides that

opposition to the granting of a motion, or a statement of non-opposition thereto, must be served

upon the moving party, and filed with this court, no later than fourteen days preceding the

noticed hearing date or, in this instance, by February 6, 2013. Local Rule 230(c) further

provides that “[n]o party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments

if opposition to the motion has not been timely filed by that party.”

1

Case 2:10-cv-01928-TLN-EFB Document 63 Filed 02/07/13 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

Local Rule 110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be grounds for

imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the

inherent power of the Court.” See also Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995)

(“Failure to follow a district court’s local rules is a proper ground for dismissal.”).

Accordingly, good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The hearing on defendant’s motion for summary judgment, Dckt. No. 62, is continued

to March 6, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 8.

2. Plaintiff shall show cause, in writing, no later than February 20, 2013, why sanctions

should not be imposed for failure to timely file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to

the pending motion.

3. Plaintiff shall file an opposition to the motion, or a statement of non-opposition

thereto, no later than February 20, 2013.

4. Failure of plaintiff to file an opposition to the motion will be deemed a statement of

non-opposition thereto, and may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for

lack of prosecution and/or for failure to comply with court orders and this court’s Local Rules. 

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

5. Defendant may file a reply to plaintiff’s opposition, if any, on or before February 27,

2013.

SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 7, 2013.

2

Case 2:10-cv-01928-TLN-EFB Document 63 Filed 02/07/13 Page 2 of 2