Stainer

(PC) Callins v. Stainer

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 10, 20201:17-cv-00840California475 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9 10 CARLTON R. CALLINS, Case No. 1:17-cv-00840-DAD-EPG (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO FILE

OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT OF NON-

v. OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

C. PFEIFFER, et al.,

15 Defendants. 16 Carlton Callins (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 22, 2019, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 51). The Court gave Plaintiff until December 20, 2019, to file an opposition. (ECF No. 48, p. 2). The deadline for Plaintiff to respond to the motion has passed, and Plaintiff has not filed an opposition or a statement of non-opposition. Local Rule 230(l) provides that the failure “to file an opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion and may result in the imposition 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.