Underwood v. Knowles et al
ORDER Granting Plaintiff's 129 Motion to Submit Three Affidavits in Support of Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment; ORDER for Clerk to File Three Affidavits as Plaintiff's Exhibits in Support of his Opposition signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 06/08/2012. (Flores, E)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
VALENTINE E. UNDERWOOD,
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO SUBMIT THREE
AFFIDAVITS IN SUPPORT OF
OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR
M. KNOWLES, et al.,
ORDER FOR CLERK TO FILE THREE
AFFIDAVITS AS PLAINTIFF’S EXHIBITS
IN SUPPORT OF HIS OPPOSITION
Valentine Underwood ("Plaintiff") is a prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on July
17, 2008. (Doc. 1.) This action now proceeds on the original Complaint, against defendants
Correctional Officer (“C/O”) M. Northcutt and C/O S. Martin for retaliation, in violation of the
First Amendment; and against defendants C/O M. Northcutt, C/O S. Martin, C/O D. Caviness, C/O
A. Trujillo, and C/O P. Truitt, ("Defendants") for use of excessive force, in violation of the Eighth
Amendment.1 The parties have consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
Defendant Seth Lantz was dismissed from this action on July 18, 2011, via Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss.
(Doc. 107.) Defendant J. Fambrough was dismissed from this action on December 9, 2011, via Plaintiff's motion to
dismiss. (Doc. 121.) All other claims and defendants were dismissed by the Court on October 21, 2009, based on
Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. (Doc. 31.)
§ 636(c), and on June 15, 2011, this case was reassigned to the undersigned for all further
proceedings. (Docs. 4, 97, 102.)
Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on February 17, 2012. (Doc. 122.) On
April 26, 2012, Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion. (Doc. 127.) Four days later, on April
30, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion to submit three certified affidavits in support of his opposition.
(Doc. 129.) Defendants have not responded to Plaintiff’s motion.
Plaintiff explains that he was unable to submit the certified affidavits with his opposition
because he did not receive the affidavits until after he had submitted the opposition. Good cause
appearing, Plaintiff’s motion shall be granted, and the certified affidavits shall be filed as exhibits
to the opposition.
Therefore, based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
Plaintiff’s motion to submit three certified affidavits in support of his opposition
to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED; and
The Clerk is DIRECTED to file Plaintiff’s three affidavits, attached to the Motion
filed on April 30, 2012 (Doc. 129), as Plaintiff’s exhibits in support of his
opposition (Doc. 127) to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
June 8, 2012
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?