Rhoden v. Department of State Hospitals et al

Filing 51

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATION recommending Plaintiff's MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 50 be denied, without prejudice signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 3/11/2019. Referred to Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill; Objections to F&R's due within 14-Days. (Lundstrom, T)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LAWTIS DONALD RHODEN, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 v. DEPARTMENT OF STATE HOSPITALS, et al., Defendants. 16 Case No.: 1:18-cv-00101-LJO-SAB (PC) FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BE DENIED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE [ECF No. 50] Plaintiff Lawtis Donald Rhoden is a civil detainee appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in 17 18 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, filed March 7, 2019. 19 20 Although the time to file an opposition has not yet expired, the Court finds no response necessary 21 because Plaintiff’s motion must be denied as procedurally deficient. 22 I. 23 DISCUSSION This action is proceeding against Defendants Pam Ahlin and Brandon Price for due process 24 25 violation and against Defendants Brandon Price and Stephanie Heggen for denial of free exercise of 26 religion.1 27 28 1 Defendant Stephanie Heggen has not yet been served with process. (See ECF No. 45.) 1 1 2 On August 24, 2018, Defendants Ahlin and Price filed an answer to the complaint. 3 On January 22, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint to add 4 Defendant Stephanie Heggen, and granted Defendants Ahlin and Price the opportunity to amend their 5 answer is so desired. (ECF No. 45.) On February 21, 2019, Defendant Price filed an amended complaint to the fifth amended 6 7 complaint. (ECF No. 48.) On March 4, 2019, the Court issued an amended scheduling order and set the deadline for 8 9 10 completion of discovery for June 27, 2019, and the deadline to file dispositive motions for August 27, 2019. (ECF No. 49.) In the instant motion, Plaintiff seeks summary judgment on the merits of his claims against 11 12 Defendants Brandon Price and Pam Ahlin. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is procedurally 13 deficient and should be denied, without prejudice. Plaintiff’s motion did not comply with Local Rule 14 260(a), which requires that “[e]ach motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication shall be 15 accompanied by a ‘Statement of Undisputed Facts’ that shall enumerate discretely each of the specific 16 material relied upon in support of the motion and cite the particular portions of any pleading, affidavit, 17 deposition, interrogatory answer, admission, or other document relied upon to establish that fact.” 18 Compliance with Local Rule 260(a) is mandatory, and as a result of Plaintiff’s failure to include a 19 Statement of Undisputed Facts with his motion, it is procedurally defective and should be denied, 20 without prejudice, on that ground. See Engrahm v. Cty. of Colusa, No. 2:04-cv-01290-GEB-GGH, 21 2005 WL 3440025, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2005) (failure to comply with Local Rule 260 is an 22 appropriate basis for denying a motion for summary judgment). 23 II. 24 RECOMMENDATION Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s motion for summary 25 26 judgment be DENIED, without prejudice. 27 /// 28 /// 2 This Findings and Recommendation will be submitted to the United States District Judge 1 2 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen (14) days 3 after being served with this Findings and Recommendation, the parties may file written objections 4 with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 5 Recommendation.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may 6 result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014) 7 (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 8 9 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 11, 2019 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?