Robinson v. Cate

Full title: ANDRE JAMAL ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. MATTHEW CATE, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Mar 13, 2015

2:11-cv-02555 MCE AC P (E.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2015)

Opinion

ANDRE JAMAL ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. MATTHEW CATE, et al., Defendants. No. 2:11-cv-02555 MCE AC P United States District Court, E.D. California. March 13, 2015

          ORDER

          ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge.

         On February 13, 2015, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff's opposition was due on or before March 6, 2015. See Local Rule 230(l). Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within twenty-one days after the filing date of this order, plaintiff shall file and serve an opposition to the motion for summary judgment or a statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).