Grant v. Knipp et al

Filing 39

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/10/13 ordering that within 7 days from the date of this order, defendant shall file further briefing concerning plaintiff's deposition testimony that he was handcuffed prior to the use of force herein. Plaintiff's reply shall be filed 14 days thereafter. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DARRAN GRANT,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:11-cv-2302 KJM KJN P

v.

ORDER

WILLIAM KNIPP, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel. This civil rights action is

17
18

proceeding on the complaint filed August 30, 2011. Defendant Palomares1 filed a motion for

19

summary judgment, which is presently submitted for decision. However, in his deposition,

20

plaintiff claims that defendant Palomares cuffed plaintiff’s hands prior to the alleged use of

21

excessive force. (Pl.’s Depo. at 22.) However, defendant did not address such testimony in the

22

motion for summary judgment.
Conversely, in plaintiff’s statement of undisputed facts, plaintiff did not dispute (ECF No.

23
24

37 at 1, 2-3) the defendant’s undisputed fact No. 19: “Once on the ground, Officer Palomares

25

ordered Grant to place his hands behind his back. Grant complied and Officer Palomares applied

26

handcuffs.” (ECF No. 30-3 at 3.) Plaintiff did not address his deposition testimony on this issue.

27

1

Defendant Knipp was dismissed by order filed November 23, 2011. (ECF No. 11.)

28
1

1

In his complaint plaintiff states, under penalty of perjury, that the hearing officer asked plaintiff’s

2

questions of defendant in the subsequent rules violation report hearing, including:
Q: Why didn’t you just tell me to put my hands on my head
to cuff me up?

3
4

A: I utilized the authorized cuffing techniques that I
believed would best insure my safety.

5
6

(ECF No. 1 at 6.)

7

Accordingly, within seven days, defendant shall address plaintiff’s testimony as to the

8

timing of the handcuffing in the context of his motion. Plaintiff’s reply shall be filed fourteen

9

days thereafter. The court is not inclined to grant extensions of time for either party.

10

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within seven days from the date of this order, defendant

11

shall file further briefing concerning plaintiff’s deposition testimony that he was handcuffed prior

12

to the use of force herein. Plaintiff’s reply shall be filed fourteen days thereafter.

13

Dated: December 10, 2013

14
15

/gran2302.fb

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2