From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Card v. Carey

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 4, 2008
No. CIV S-06-1027 GEB GGH P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 4, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-1027 GEB GGH P.

February 4, 2008


ORDER


Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 2, 2008, defendant Nunez filed a summary judgment motion. On January 10, 2008, plaintiff filed a response to this motion. Plaintiff states that he does not oppose the motion, but reserves the right to re-file charges against defendant Nunez.

The court does not construe plaintiff's January 10, 2008, pleading as a statement of non-opposition to defendant's motion based on plaintiff's request that he be allowed to "refile" charges against defendant Nunez. If the court grants defendant's motion for summary judgment, plaintiff will most likely be precluded from refiling his claims against defendant. For these reasons, the court construes plaintiff's response as a request to voluntarily dismiss the claims against defendant Nunez.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant Nunez shall notify this court, within ten days, whether he has any objection to the dismissal of the claims against him. Should defendant fail to respond, plaintiff's request will be granted pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(2).


Summaries of

Card v. Carey

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 4, 2008
No. CIV S-06-1027 GEB GGH P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 4, 2008)
Case details for

Card v. Carey

Case Details

Full title:JOHN CARD, Plaintiff, v. TOM L.CAREY, et al., Defendants

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

Date published: Feb 4, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-06-1027 GEB GGH P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 4, 2008)