Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00054/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00054-9/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

MARCUS R. ELLINGTON,

Plaintiff,

v.

CLARK, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00054-OWW-DLB PC

OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS

DUE WITHIN TWENTY DAYS

Plaintiff Marcus R. Ellington (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the California

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 8, 2009,

Defendants Lunes, Reynoso, Polk, Diaz, Jones, and Ken Clark filed a motion to dismiss. 

Plaintiff has yet to file an opposition to Defendants’ motion.1

Because Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court will grant Plaintiff an extension of time

to file his opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Plaintiff is granted twenty (20) days

from the date of service of this order in which to file his opposition. Failure to file an opposition

will be construed as a waiver of opposition.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 3, 2010 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

77e0d6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On December 24, 2009, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting injunctive relief, stating that he had no access

1

to the law library because of actions at Kern Valley State Prison. (Doc. 44.) By separate Findings and

Recommendation, the Court recommended that Plaintiff’s motion be denied for lack of jurisdiction.

1

Case 1:09-cv-00054-OWW -DLB Document 60 Filed 06/03/10 Page 1 of 1