Lockwood

(PC) Rood v. Lockwood

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 8, 20222:20-cv-00271California471 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 COLTON JAMES ROOD, No. 2:20-cv-0271 KJM AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER 14 ISAAC LOCKWOOD, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 18 § 1983, has filed a motion to dismiss defendants’ motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 66. 19 He requests that the motion for summary judgment be denied because defendants failed to serve 20 him with a Rand Notice for nearly two years. Id. at 2. He further asserts that defendants failed to 21 comply with the court’s November 23, 2022 order, which required defendants serve plaintiff with 22 a Rand Notice within twenty-four hours, because he did not receive the notice until November 28, 23 2022. Id. 24 Defendants were not required to serve plaintiff with a Rand Notice until they filed a 25 motion for summary judgment. See ECF No. 25 at 4, ¶ 11 (citing Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 26 935 (9th Cir. 2012); Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 957…

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.