Dorian Davis v. Flores et al

Filing 79

ORDER Requiring Further Briefing (Docket No. 48 , 77 ), signed by District Judge Jeffrey T. Miller on 7/17/2012. (Fahrney, E)

Download PDF
1 JM 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 FRESNO DIVISION 10 11 12 13 Case No.: 1:08-CV-1197 JTM (JMA) DORIAN DAVIS aka WALI AL-TAQUI, CDC #k-78041, ORDER REQUIRING FURTHER BRIEFING Plaintiff, vs. Docket No. 48, 77 14 15 16 17 E.G. FLORES, et al., Defendants. On January 18, 2011, this court granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment as to 18 all remaining claims and parties. Plaintiff appealed. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the prior 19 dismissal of Plaintiff’s Equal Protection Claim and the grant of summary judgment on Plaintiff’s 20 First Amendment and RLUIPA claims premised on the temporary suspension of in-cell use of 21 prayer oil. However, it vacated and remanded for further proceedings as to Plaintiff’s First 22 Amendment and RLUIPA claims premised on a prison prohibition of unsupervised inmate-led 23 religious services. 24 Defendants did not address Plaintiff’s First Amendment and RLUIPA claims based on 25 the prohibition of unsupervised inmate-led religious services. For that reason, Defendants will 1 1 be provided with an opportunity to supplement their motion for summary judgment with 2 additional briefing. 3 If Defendants wish to move for summary judgment on the grounds discussed above, they 4 shall file a supplemental brief of no more than ten pages on or before August 24, 2012. If 5 Plaintiff wishes to oppose Defendants’ motion, he shall submit an opposition brief of no more 6 than ten pages on or before October 5, 2012. Upon receipt of each party’s brief, the court will 7 take the matter under submission 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 10 DATED: July 17, 2012 ______________________________ Jeffrey T. Miller United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2

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?