Townsend

(PC) Earp v. Townsend

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 17, 20232:21-cv-01656California846 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DONNY Y. EARP, No. 2: 21-cv-1656 KJN P Plaintiff, v. ORDER & FINDINGS &

RECOMMENDATIONS

TOWNSEND, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. For the reasons stated herein, the undersigned recommends that this action be dismissed. On February 28, 2022 (ECF No. 17) and February 10, 2023 (ECF No. 28-3) plaintiff was advised of the requirements for opposing a motion pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 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). On February 10, 2023, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56. (ECF No. 28.) On March 9, 2023, the undersigned granted plaintiff a sixty days extension of time to file his opposition to defendant’s summary judgment motion. (ECF No.…

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.