Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01420/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-01420-1/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

BERNIE NORIEGA,

Plaintiff,

v.

MATTHEW CATE, et al.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

Case No. 1:13-cv-01420-LJO-BAM PC

ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE 

OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NONOPPOSITION WITHIN TWENTY-ONE 

DAYS

(ECF No. 21)

Plaintiff Bernie Noreiga, a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, 

filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on September 9, 2013. This action 

proceeds against Defendant Bunnell for deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s serious medical needs 

in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

On January 28, 2015, Defendant Bunnell filed a motion for summary judgment. Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 56. In lieu of an opposition, Plaintiff filed a motion to appoint counsel, along with a 

request for a thirty-day extension of time. (ECF No. 24.) On April 2, 2015, the Court denied, 

without prejudice, the motion to appoint counsel. However, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion 

for an extension of time and directed Plaintiff to file his opposition within thirty (30) days after 

service. (ECF No. 25.) Plaintiff’s opposition was due on May 5, 2015. To date, Plaintiff has not 

filed an opposition. 

Pursuant to Local Rule 230(l), Plaintiff is HEREBY ORDERED to file an opposition or a 

statement of non-opposition to Defendant’s motion within twenty-one (21) days. Plaintiff is 

Case 1:13-cv-01420-LJO-BAM Document 26 Filed 05/11/15 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

warned that the failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this action, with 

prejudice, for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 11, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-01420-LJO-BAM Document 26 Filed 05/11/15 Page 2 of 2