Satterfield
(PC) Fernandez v. Satterfield
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JORGE FERNANDEZ, Case No. 1:19-cv-01220-DAD-BAK (EPG) (PC)
Plaintiff,
ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE TO
v. MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
SATTERFIELD, et al., 30-DAY DEADLINE Defendants.
16 Plaintiff Jorge Fernandez (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action. On April 19, 2022, Defendants Bick, Boyette, Darby, Eslick, Flores, Salzer, and Satterfield (“Defendants”) filed a motion for partial summary judgment for Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies. (ECF No. 64.) Pursuant to Local Rule 230(l), and as explained in Defendants’ Notice of Motion (id. at 2), Plaintiff had 21 days to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment. Although more than the provided time has passed, Plaintiff has failed to do so.1 While a motion for summary judgment cannot be granted by default, Heinemann v. 26 …