Rackley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 RAMIN SARIASLAN, No. 2:15-cv-2492-MCE-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER RONALD RACKLEY, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil rights action. On April 20, 2020, defendants Polasik and Rackley filed a motion for summary judgment and informed plaintiff of the requirements for opposing a motion for summary judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56; Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 962-63 (9th Cir. 1998). ECF No. 69. Despite an extension of time granted to plaintiff (ECF No. 72), he has not filed an opposition or a statement of non- opposition to defendants’ motion. Polasik and Rackley Pursuant to Local Rule 230(l), an “[o]pposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be served and filed by the responding party not more than twenty-one (21), days after the date of service of the motion.” Id. A responding party’s failure “to file an opposition or to file a statement of…