Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02225/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02225-4/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

 Pursuant to this court’s April 19, 2006 order, defendants Brown and Largent have until 1

May 19, 2006 to file and serve a response to plaintiff’s complaint. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES WHITTENBERG,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2225 GEB PAN P

vs.

V. BORTOLAMEDI, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On April 10, 2006, defendants Bortolamedi, Johnson and Yelton filed a motion to

dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b). Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. 1

Local Rule 78-230(m) provides in part: “Failure of the responding party to file

written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any

opposition to the granting of the motion . . . .” On February 1, 2006, plaintiff was advised of the

requirements for filing an opposition to the motion and that failure to oppose such a motion may

be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion. 

Local Rule 11-110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be

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

Case 2:04-cv-02225-GEB-EFB Document 19 Filed 05/18/06 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

2

inherent power of the Court.” In the order filed February 1, 2006, plaintiff was advised that

failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation that the action be

dismissed.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty days of the

date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any he has, to the motion to dismiss or a

statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation

that plaintiff’s claims against defendants Bortolamedi, Johnson and Yelton be dismissed pursuant

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

DATED: May 17, 2006.

whit2225.46osc

Case 2:04-cv-02225-GEB-EFB Document 19 Filed 05/18/06 Page 2 of 2