Endsley v. Mayberg et al
Filing
36
ORDER vacating 33 Motion for Summary Judgment signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 05/11/11. (Plummer, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
MARC ANTHONY LOWELL ENDSLEY,
9
10
11
12
13
14
Plaintiff,
No. CIV S-09-2311 WBS GGH P
vs.
STEPHEN MAYBERG, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
/
Plaintiff pro se, civilly committed to a state mental hospital, seeks relief pursuant
15
to 42 U.S.C.§ 1983. Plaintiff filed a motion for partial summary judgment on April 13, 2011.
16
On April 15, 2011, defendants filed a response to a request for an extension of time to plaintiff’s
17
putative request for 45 more days to respond to discovery requests from all five defendants.
18
Defendants stated they had no objection so long as defendants were granted an extension of time
19
to respond to plaintiff’s partial summary judgment motion. On April 27, 2011, defendants filed
20
an ex parte application either for the court to deny plaintiff’s partial summary judgment motion
21
or for the court to grant a continuance under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d) for defendants to respond to
22
plaintiff’s partial summary judgment motion until the dispositive motion deadline. Plaintiff has
23
filed no response to these filings, nor is there evidence in the case docket that he filed the
24
extension request defendants reference.
25
26
Defendants indicate the discovery requests were served on March 1, 2011.
Plaintiff’s responses therefore would be due by April 15, 2011, but pursuant to a 45-day
1
1
extension would be due on May 30, 2011. There being no record of plaintiff’s having sought an
2
extension of time to serve discovery responses, the court is left to infer that defendants
3
themselves have at least implicitly permitted plaintiff the additional time as defendants have not
4
brought a motion to compel discovery. Currently, the discovery and scheduling order set the
5
discovery cut-off date as July 27, 2011. The dispositive motion deadline is currently set for
6
November 8, 2011.
7
Plaintiff’s discovery responses are evidently to be served by or before May 30,
8
2011; if necessary, defendants would have ample time between May 30, 2011, and July 27, 2011,
9
the discovery deadline, to bring any motion to compel. As to the pending motion, defendants
10
should not be required to oppose plaintiff’s partial summary judgment motion while he has not
11
served any discovery responses defendants deem important to any opposition. See Christina
12
Carroll Declaration, docket # 35. The court will not require defendants to file an opposition to
13
any form of a summary judgment motion brought before discovery closes. Defendants indicate
14
their intention to file their own dispositive motion by November 8, 2011. Plaintiff is premature
15
in seeking any form of summary judgment where arguably relevant discovery remains
16
outstanding and his motion for partial summary judgment will be vacated without prejudice to
17
his re-noticing it after discovery closes.
18
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s premature motion for partial summary judgment,
19
filed on April 13, 2011 (docket # 33), is hereby vacated from the court’s calendar, subject to
20
plaintiff’s re-noticing it once discovery closes.
21
DATED: May 11, 2011
/s/ Gregory G. Hollows
22
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
GGH:009
23
ends2311.ord
24
25
26
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?