Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01029/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-01029-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Tony Hedgpeth
Defendant
Sophan Pok
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

 Klingele and Rand together require the district court “as a bare minimum,” to ensure that a pro

se prisoner has “fair notice of the requirements of the summary judgment rule.” Klingele, 849 F.2d at

411 (quotations omitted); Rand, 154 F.3d at 962.

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\JAH\08cv1029-EDCA-Klingele-Rand.wpd -1- E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 1:08-cv-01029

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FRESNO DIVISION

SOPHAN POK,

CDCR # T-88438,

Civil No. 08-1029 JAH (NLS)

Plaintiff, ORDER PROVIDING NOTICE 

TO PRO SE PRISONER 

OF REQUIREMENTS FOR

OPPOSING SUMMARY

JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO

KLINGELE / RAND AND 

SETTING BRIEFING 

SCHEDULE 

vs.

TONY HEDGPETH, Warden, 

Kern Valley State Prison,

Defendant.

This notice is required to be given to Plaintiff pursuant to Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952

(9th Cir. 1998) (en banc) and Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409 (9th Cir. 1988):1

Defendant has filed a Motion to Dismiss and a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant

to FED.R.CIV.P. 56 [Doc. No. 31], by which he seeks to have your case dismissed. A Motion

for Summary Judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will, if granted,

end your case.

/ / /

Case 1:08-cv-01029-JAH-NLS Document 32 Filed 06/17/10 Page 1 of 3
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

 While this case was randomly referred upon filing to the Honorable Magistrate Judge Nita L.

Stormes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) for disposition, the Court has determined that a Report

and Recommendation regarding the disposition of Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is

unnecessary. 

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\JAH\08cv1029-EDCA-Klingele-Rand.wpd -2- E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 1:08-cv-01029

Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to oppose a Motion for Summary Judgment.

Generally, summary judgment must be granted when there is no genuine issue of material fact--

that is, if there is no real dispute about any fact that would affect the result of your case, and the

party who asked for summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, which will

end your case. When a party you are suing makes a motion for summary judgment that is

properly supported by declarations (or other sworn testimony), you cannot simply rely on what

your complaint says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in declarations, depositions,

answers to interrogatories, or authenticated documents, as provided by Rule 56(e), that

contradict the facts shown in the defendants’ declarations and documents and show that there

is a genuine issue of material fact for trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in

opposition, summary judgment, if appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary

judgment is granted, your case will be dismissed and there will be no trial.

Conclusion and Order

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment has

been calendared for hearing on Monday, August 2, 2010, at 2:30 p.m. in Courtroom 11.2

 Your

Opposition (including any supporting documents) must be filed with the Court and served on

all parties by Monday, July 19, 2010. Defendant is instructed that Plaintiff shall not be limited

in the amount of copies necessary to prepare his Opposition. See CAL. CODE REGS. tit. 15,

§ 3162(c). If you do not wish to oppose Defendant’s Motion, you should file and serve a

“Notice of Non-Opposition” by that same date to let both the Court and Defendant know that

the Motion is unopposed. If you do file and serve an Opposition, Defendant must file and serve

his Reply to that Opposition by Monday, July 26, 2010.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 1:08-cv-01029-JAH-NLS Document 32 Filed 06/17/10 Page 2 of 3
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

K:\COMMON\EVERYONE\_EFILE-PROSE\JAH\08cv1029-EDCA-Klingele-Rand.wpd -3- E.D. Cal. Civil Case No. 1:08-cv-01029

At the time appointed for hearing, the Court will, in its discretion, consider Defendant’s

Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 56 as submitted on the papers, and will

issue its written opinion soon thereafter. Thus, unless otherwise ordered, no appearances are

required and no oral argument will be heard. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 16, 2010 ____________________________________ HON. JOHN A. HOUSTON

United States District Judge

Case 1:08-cv-01029-JAH-NLS Document 32 Filed 06/17/10 Page 3 of 3