(PC) Allen v. Kramer

Opinion

41.407 UV □□□ LYALL VL bMVVULITICIIL VO PHM VOrLsicy Payee +vr1re FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DAVID ALLEN, Case No. 1:15-cv-01609-DAD-JDP Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING DEFENDANTS TO v. RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE DECEASED DEFENDANT STEPHANIE CLENDENIN, et al., ECE No. 97 Defendants. RESPONSE DUE WITHIN 30 DAYS □□ Plaintiff moves to substitute a representative for the deceased defendant Cliff Allenby. ECF No. 97. Plaintiff's motion is unopposed. However, it does not name the person to be substituted or indicate whether it has been served on that individual. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a){3) (requiring service of a motion to substitute). The burden of identifying defendant Cliff Allenby’s personal representative falls upon defendants. See Gilmore v. Lockard, 936 F.3d 857, 867 (9th Cir. 2019). Thus, defendants are ordered to identify that individual within 30 days. After that individual has been identified, plaintiff must serve his motion upon him or her, and the court will allow an opportunity for that nonparty to respond to plaintiff's motion. IT IS SO ORDERED. 57 Dated: August 11, 2020 \ prssanp Rae — UNI STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

No. 204.