From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Upchurch v. County of Sacramento

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 1, 2010
No. CIV S-08-1263 MCE EFB P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 1, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV S-08-1263 MCE EFB P.

February 1, 2010


ORDER


Plaintiff is a prisoner without counsel seeking relief for alleged civil rights violations. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 2, 2009, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. Plaintiff has not filed an opposition or a statement of no opposition to the motion for summary judgment.

In cases in which one party is incarcerated and proceeding without counsel, motions ordinarily are submitted on the record without oral argument. Local Rule 230(l). "Opposition, if any, to the granting of the motion shall be served and filed with the Clerk by the responding party not more than twenty-one (21), days after the date of service of the motion." Id. A responding party's failure "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 and may result in the imposition of sanctions." Id. Furthermore, a party's failure to comply with any order or with the Local Rules "may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court." Local Rule 110. The court may recommend that an action be dismissed with or without prejudice, as appropriate, if a party disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in dismissing pro se plaintiff's complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file an amended complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff's failure to comply with local rule regarding notice of change of address affirmed).

On December 4, 2009, the court advised plaintiff of the requirements for filing an opposition to the motion, that failure to oppose such a motion may be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion and that failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation of dismissal.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that, within 20 days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file either an opposition to the motion for summary judgment or a statement of no opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice.


Summaries of

Upchurch v. County of Sacramento

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 1, 2010
No. CIV S-08-1263 MCE EFB P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 1, 2010)
Case details for

Upchurch v. County of Sacramento

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL UPCHURCH, Plaintiff, v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Feb 1, 2010

Citations

No. CIV S-08-1263 MCE EFB P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 1, 2010)