Brunner

(PC) Barnes v. Brunner

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 5, 20192:18-cv-02449California903 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANTOINE DESHAWN BARNES, No. 2: 18-cv-2449 JAM KJN P Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS J. BRUNNER, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 10, 2019, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies. On October 3, 2018, the court advised plaintiff of the requirements for opposing a motion for summary judgment based on plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc), and Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 411-12 (9th Cir. 1988). On August 1, 2019, plaintiff was ordered to file an opposition or a statement of non- opposition to the pending motion within thirty days. In that same order, plaintiff was advised of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.