Opinion
Case No. 1:14-cv-01525-DAD-JLT (PC)
01-21-2016
SAMUEL ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. KITT, et al., Defendants.
SECOND INFORMATIONAL ORDER - NOTICE AND WARNING OF REQUIREMENTS FOR OPPOSING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS
(Doc. 30)
21-DAY DEADLINE
Defendants have filed a motion to dismiss this action. Pursuant to Woods v. Carey, Nos. 09-15548, 09-16113, 2012 WL 2626912 (9th Cir. Jul. 6, 2012), Wyatt v. Terhune, 315 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2003), Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998), and Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409 (9th Cir. 1988), the Court hereby notifies Plaintiff of the following rights and requirements for opposing the motion:
1. Unless otherwise ordered, all motions to dismiss shall be briefed pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).
2. Plaintiff is required to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Defendants' motion to dismiss. Local Rule 230(l). If Plaintiff fails to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion, this action may be dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to prosecute. Local Rule requires the opposition, or statement of non-opposition be filed not more than 21 days after the date of service of the motion. Id. However, Plaintiff is granted 21 days from the service of this order to file his opposition or statement of non-opposition.
3. The failure to comply with this order, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or the Local Rules of the Eastern District of California may result in the imposition of sanctions including but not limited to dismissal of the action or entry of default. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 21 , 2016
/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE