Holmes

(PC) Murray v. Holmes

Bad Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 13, 20222:21-cv-00214California891 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PAUL CATANO MURRAY, No. 2:21-cv-0214 KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS &

RECOMMENDATIONS

B. HOLMES, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 21, 2021, defendant filed a motion to dismiss. Despite being granted multiple extensions of time, plaintiff did not file an opposition. On April 26, 2022, 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 the requirements for filing an opposition to the pending motion and that failure to oppose such a motion would be deemed as consent to have the: (a) pending motion granted; (b) action dismissed for lack of prosecution; and (c) action dismissed based on plaintiff’s failure to comply with these rules and a court order. Plaintiff was also informed that failure…

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.