From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harris v. Hill

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 10, 2022
2:19-cv-1037 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 10, 2022)

Opinion

2:19-cv-1037 KJM AC P

06-10-2022

EMMETT HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. RICK M. HILL, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

ALLISON CLAIRE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On May 10, 2022, defendants filed a motion for terminating sanctions based on plaintiff's failure to participate in discovery and comply with court orders. ECF No. 38. 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 sanctions or a statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).


Summaries of

Harris v. Hill

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 10, 2022
2:19-cv-1037 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 10, 2022)
Case details for

Harris v. Hill

Case Details

Full title:EMMETT HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. RICK M. HILL, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 10, 2022

Citations

2:19-cv-1037 KJM AC P (E.D. Cal. Jun. 10, 2022)