- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 MORRIS ROBINSON, Case No. 1:21-cv-00990-ADA-SAB (PC) 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT GOLLER TO RE-SERVE AND FILE 12 v. MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITH PROPER RAND NOTICE 13 J. FARMBROUGH, et al., (ECF No. 52) 14 Defendants. 15 16 Plaintiff Morris Robinson, is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 17 action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 18 On April 14, 2023, Defendant Goller filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 19 52.) 20 In Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 2012), the Ninth Circuit held that a pro se 21 prisoner plaintiff must be provided with “fair notice” of the requirements for opposing a motion 22 for summary judgment at the time the motion is brought. Review of the current motion shows 23 that Defendant Goller did not provide Plaintiff with the proper Rand notice. See Rand v. 24 Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998). Rand, 154 F.3d 961; Local Rule 260. Plaintiff is 25 entitled to service of the notice concurrently with the motion, Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 26 938-41 (9th Cir. 2012); Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d at 960-61, in order to properly file an 27 opposition if so desired, Labatad v. Corrections Corp. of America, 714 F.3d 1155, 1159 (9th Cir. 2013) (per curiam). 1 Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Within ten (10) days from the date of service of this order, Defendant Goller shall 3 serve Plaintiff (and the Court) with the motion for summary judgment along with 4 the proper Rand notice; and 5 2. Defendant’s failure to properly serve the motion for summary judgment along 6 with the proper Rand notice will result in denial of the motion by an assigned 7 District Judge. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. DAA (e_ 10 | Dated: _ April 17, 2023 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Document Info
Docket Number: 1:21-cv-00990
Filed Date: 4/17/2023
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 6/20/2024