Kuersten

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID PRIEST, No. 2: 21-cv-0058 TLN KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER BENTLEY, et al., Defendants. 16 On December 22, 2022, defendants filed a supplemental summary judgment motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. (ECF No. 75.) Plaintiff did not oppose the motion. Local Rule 230(l) provides in part: “Failure of the responding party to file written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion . . . .” Id. On September 24, 2021 (ECF No. 28) and December 22, 2022 (ECF No. 75-3), plaintiff was advised of the requirements for filing an opposition to a motion and that failure to oppose such a motion may be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion. See Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc), and Klingele v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 411-12 (9th Cir. 1988). Local Rule 110 provides that failure to…