Kramer
(PC) Allen v. Kramer
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
41.407 UV □□□ LYALL VL bMVVULITICIIL VO PHM VOrLsicy Payee +vr1re 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID ALLEN, Case No. 1:15-cv-01609-DAD-JDP Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO v. RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE DECEASED DEFENDANT STEPHANIE CLENDENIN, et al., ECE No. 97 Defendants. RESPONSE DUE WITHIN 30 DAYS □□ Plaintiff moves to substitute a representative for the deceased defendant Cliff Allenby. 17 ECF No. 97. Plaintiff's motion is unopposed. However, it does not name the person to be 18 substituted or indicate whether it has been served on that individual. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a){3) 19 (requiring service of a motion to substitute). The burden of identifying defendant Cliff Allenby’s 20 personal representative falls upon defendants. See Gilmore v. Lockard, 936 F.3d 857, 867 (9th 21 Cir.…