MICHAEL J. SENG, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Iren Anderson, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights action on November 2, 2009 pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) This matter proceeds on his second amended complaint (ECF No. 19) claims of excessive force against Defendant Hansen, failure to protect against Defendant Hartley, and failure to intervene against Defendant Lewis. (ECF No. 20.) Defendants Hansen, Hartley, and Lewis have answered. (ECF Nos. 25, 43.)
On January 9, 2013, Defendant Hartley filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 62.) Plaintiff was required to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition by not later than April 22, 2013. (ECF No. 70.) The April 22, 2013 deadline has passed without Plaintiff responding or seeking an extension of time to do so.
The Court will give Plaintiff one further opportunity to respond to the motion: Plaintiff must file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Defendant Hartley's motion for summary judgment within twenty one (21) days from the date of service of this order.
Pursuant to
1. Unless otherwise ordered, all motions for summary judgment are briefed pursuant to Local Rule 230(l).
2. Plaintiff is required to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Defendant's motion for summary judgment. Local Rule 230(l).
3. A motion for summary judgment is a request for judgment on some or all of Plaintiff's claims in favor of Defendant without trial. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). Defendant's motion sets forth the facts which he contends are not reasonably subject to dispute and that entitle him to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). This is called the statement of undisputed facts. Local Rule 260(a).
Plaintiff has the right to oppose a motion for summary judgment. To oppose the motion, Plaintiff must show proof of his claims. Plaintiff may agree with the facts set forth in Defendant's motion but argue that Defendant is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In the alternative, if Plaintiff does not agree with the facts set forth in Defendant's motion, he may show that Defendant's facts are disputed in one or more of the following ways: (1) Plaintiff may rely upon statements made under the penalty of perjury in the complaint or the opposition if (a) the complaint or opposition shows that Plaintiff has personal knowledge of the matters stated and (b) Plaintiff calls to the Court's attention those parts of the complaint or opposition upon which Plaintiff relies; (2) Plaintiff may serve and file declarations setting forth the facts which Plaintiff believes prove his claims;
In opposing Defendant's motion for summary judgment, Local Rule 260(b) requires Plaintiff to reproduce Defendant's itemized facts in the statement of undisputed facts and admit those facts which are undisputed and deny those which are disputed. If Plaintiff disputes (denies) a fact, Plaintiff must cite to the evidence used to support that denial (e.g., pleading, declaration, deposition, interrogatory answer, admission, or other document). Local Rule 260(b).
4.
5. Unsigned declarations will be stricken, and declarations not signed under penalty of perjury have no evidentiary value.
6. The failure of any party to comply with this Order, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or the Local Rules of the Eastern District of California may result in the imposition of sanctions including but not limited to dismissal of the action or entry of default.