Edwards v. Magallanes et al

Filing 36

ORDER denying 27 Motion for Summary Judgment, without prejudice, for failure to provide the appropriate Rand Notice signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 11/6/2018. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

STEVEN R. EDWARDS,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
MAGALLANES, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

19
20

Case No.: 1:16-cv-00975-SAB (PC)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, FOR
FAILURE TO PROVIDE THE APPROPRIATE
RAND NOTICE
[ECF No. 27]

Plaintiff Steven R. Edwards is appearing pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.

17
18

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

§ 1983.
On July 12, 2018, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment.

(ECF No. 27.)

Defendants also delivered a courtesy copy of the motion to the Court.

21

In Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 939 (9th Cir. 2012), the Ninth Circuit held that a pro se

22

prisoner plaintiff must be provided with “fair notice” of the requirements for opposing a motion for

23

summary judgment at the time the motion is brought. Review of the current motion shows that

24

Defendants did not provide Plaintiff with a Rand notice upon the filing of the motion for summary

25

judgment. See Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998). Defendants have failed to provide

26

Plaintiff with the proper required Rand notice. In particular, Defendants failed to file a separate form

27

notice of all the Rand requirements independent of the summary judgment motion or papers filed in

28

support thereof. Rand, 154 F.3d at 960. In addition, Defendants failed to advise Plaintiff of the
1

1

contents of any applicable Eastern District of California Local Rule requirements, i.e., Local Rule 260.

2

Id. at 961.

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

4

1.

Defendants’ motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 27) is DENIED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE;

5
2.

6

Defendants are granted an extension of time, shall file their motion for summary

7

judgment within fourteen (14) days of the date of entry of this order, and shall provide

8

Plaintiff with the appropriate Rand notice;
3.

9

Defendants are relieved of their obligation to provide any additional courtesy copy to
the Court of their summary judgment motion. Local Rule 130(b);

10
4.

11

Within thirty (30) days from the date of service of the Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment, Plaintiff may file an opposition; and

12
5.

13

Defendants may file a reply to any opposition within seven (7) days from the date it is
filed.

14
15
16
17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

November 6, 2018
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2