Stephenson v. Martel

Full title: ROBERT E. STEPHENSON, Plaintiff, v. M. MARTEL, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Jun 18, 2013

2:10-cv-0238 AC P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 18, 2013)

Opinion

ROBERT E. STEPHENSON, Plaintiff, v. M. MARTEL, et al., Defendants. No. 2:10-cv-0238 AC P United States District Court, E.D. California. June 18, 2013

          ORDER

          ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge.

         Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding in pro per and seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.¹ On April 11, 2013, following review of the parties' pretrial statements, the undersigned issued an order to show cause why summary judgment should not be entered for defendants in light of plaintiff's failure to meet his burden of proof on his Eighth Amendment claim. ECF No. 77. Plaintiff has not responded to the court order.

1 This action is proceeding before the undersigned pursuant to the parties' consent. ECF Nos. 5, 58.

         Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the court's April 11, 2013 order and after giving plaintiff notice and a reasonable time to respond, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

         1. The April 11, 2013 order to show cause is vacated;

         2. Judgment is entered for defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f); and

         3. This case is closed.