From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Haney v. Eptstein

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 24, 2012
CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01506-LJO-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2012)

Opinion

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01506-LJO-SKO PC

08-24-2012

BRUCE PATRICK HANEY, Plaintiff, v. L. EPTSTEIN, et al., Defendants.


ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE

OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NON-

OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT


(Doc. 34)


TWENTY-ONE DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff Bruce Patrick Haney is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil action for violation of his rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action for damages is proceeding on Plaintiff's First Amendment retaliation claim against Defendants Epstein and Gonzales. On August 23, 2012, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment.

Plaintiff is HEREBY ORDERED to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the motion within twenty-one (21) days from the date of service of this order. Local Rule 230(l). Plaintiff is warned that the failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of the action, with prejudice, for failure to obey a court order and failure to prosecute. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Although Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated, Local Rule 230(l) shall continue to apply to this action, in accordance with the Court's general practice.

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Haney v. Eptstein

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 24, 2012
CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01506-LJO-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2012)
Case details for

Haney v. Eptstein

Case Details

Full title:BRUCE PATRICK HANEY, Plaintiff, v. L. EPTSTEIN, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Aug 24, 2012

Citations

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-01506-LJO-SKO PC (E.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 2012)