Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01867/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01867-7/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADLER,

Plaintiff,

v.

GONZALES, et al,

Defendants.

1:13-cv-01867-LJO-SKO (PC)

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE 

OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NONOPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION 

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

(Doc. 34)

TWENTY-ONE (21) DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Brent Adler, a former state prisoner who is proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on November 18, 2013. This 

action for damages is proceeding against Defendants Gonzalez, Holland, Steadman, Bryant, 

Zanchi, Lundy, and Schuyler for violating Plaintiff’s right to adequate outdoor exercise under the 

Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution while he was incarcerated at California 

Correctional Institution in Tehachapi between 2008 and 2011. 

On March 30, 2016, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment which included 

notice to Plaintiff of the requirements to oppose the motion. (Doc. 34.) Further, on March 31, 

2016, the Second Informational Order issued which also informed Plaintiff of the requirements to 

adequately oppose a motion for summary judgment in detail and that his opposition or statement 

of non-opposition was due within 21 days of service of Defendants’ motion. (Doc. 36.) Plaintiff 

has not filed an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion despite lapse of more 

than the requisite time. Local Rule 230(l). 

Case 1:13-cv-01867-DAD-SKO Document 37 Filed 05/05/16 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

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 

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

within twenty-one (21) days from the date of service of this order; and

2. Plaintiff is warned that the failure to comply with this order will result 

recommendation that this action be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to 

prosecute and for failure to obey a court order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 5, 2016 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01867-DAD-SKO Document 37 Filed 05/05/16 Page 2 of 2