Gray v. County of Kern

Filing 71

ORDER RE PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER STRIKING CERTAIN ARGUMENTS PRESENTED IN DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on May 11, 2018. (Munoz, I)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10 ARTHUR GRAY,
11
12

Case No. 1:14-cv-00204-LJO-JLT
ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE
APPLICATION FOR ORDER
STRIKING CERTAIN ARGUMENTS
PRESENTED IN DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT

Plaintiff,
v.

13 COUNTY OF KERN,
14

Defendant.

15
16
17

This case concerns claims brought under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”)

18 and related federal and state statutes regarding alleged “architectural barriers” Plaintiff Arthur Gray
19 encountered at Kern Medical Center (“KMC”). Id. Before the is Plaintiff’s ex parte application for an
20 order striking certain arguments presented in Defendant Kern County’s motion for summary judgment.
21 ECF No. 68. Defendant filed a response. ECF No. 70.
22

In its March 26, 2018 order authorizing supplemental briefing, the Court only explicitly invited

23 briefing on the mootness of Plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief pertaining to the slopes of the external
24 ramps at KMC. ECF No. 61. However, barring a deadline precluding further dispositive motions
25 practice, a party may move for summary judgment “at any time.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. Here, the
1

1

stipulation between the parties did not preclude raising additional issues and the Court believes

2

addressing these fairly straightforward matters on summary judgment may aid judicial and party

3

efficiency.

4
5

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s ex parte application for an order striking additional arguments in
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED.

6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

May 11, 2018

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2