Leonard v. Denny, et al
Filing
179
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/30/18 DISCHARGING 171 Order to Show Cause; DENYING 175 Motion to Strike; and GRANTING plaintiff 14 day after being served with this order to file his response to 164 Motion for Summary Judgment. (Coll, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DAVID G. LEONARD,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:12-cv-0915 TLN AC P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
JIM DENNY, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
On October 29, 2018, after plaintiff moved to strike the declaration of Robert Kersten as
18
technically defective, counsel for defendants were ordered to file a properly signed version of the
19
declaration and show cause why they should not be sanctioned for repeatedly failing to comply
20
with the rules and orders of this court. ECF No. 171. Counsel has responded to the order to show
21
cause (ECF No. 172) and filed a properly signed declaration (ECF Nos. 173, 177). Upon
22
consideration of counsel’s response, the undersigned finds that counsel has sufficiently
23
demonstrated why sanctions should not issue. However, while counsel is correct that the
24
technical and administrative oversights at issue would normally be curable without court
25
involvement, the fact remains that in this case such errors have repeatedly required the court’s
26
attention. Moreover, the standards of professionalism that generally require counsel to pay
27
rigorous attention to detail are not lowered because this is a prisoner case. Counsel are advised to
28
take care in the future to check, or have someone check, future filings for compliance with the
1
1
2
applicable rules and orders of this court.
Plaintiff has also filed a motion to strike the defendants’ undisputed statement of facts,
3
and consequently their motion for summary judgment, for failure to comply with Local Rule
4
260(a). ECF No. 175. In response to plaintiff’s motion to strike Robert Kersten’s declaration,
5
plaintiff was explicitly advised that “any further objections he has to defendants’ motion for
6
summary judgment or its supporting documentation should be included in his response to the
7
motion and not filed as separate motions.” ECF No. 171 at 2. He was further warned that “[a]ny
8
requests to extend the deadline to respond to defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on
9
plaintiff filing piecemeal objections to the motion will be denied.” Id. Not only has plaintiff
10
ignored this court’s explicit instructions, but to the extent he argues that defendants have failed to
11
discretely enumerate each material fact relied on, the court finds that the undisputed statement of
12
facts substantially complies with Local Rule 260(a). As to plaintiff’s claims that the statement of
13
facts is not properly supported by citations to the record, these arguments should be made as part
14
of his response to the statement of facts, not as part of a separate motion. The motion to strike
15
will therefore be denied.
16
Because the deadline for responding to the motion for summary judgment was November
17
29, 2018, if plaintiff has not already submitted his response to the motion for summary judgment,
18
he shall be given a brief extension of time to do so. Any further objections to the motion for
19
summary judgment, statement of facts, or supporting documentation that are not accompanied by
20
a response to the motion for summary judgment will be denied and will not result in a further
21
extension of plaintiff’s deadline to respond. Furthermore, plaintiff is cautioned that if his
22
response to the motion for summary judgment is based solely on alleged technical deficiencies
23
with the motion or supporting documents, and those alleged deficiencies are not sufficient to
24
warrant denial of the motion, he will not be given a separate opportunity to respond to the merits
25
of the motion.
26
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
27
1. The order to show cause (ECF No. 171) is discharged;
28
2. Plaintiff’s motion to strike (ECF No. 175) is denied; and
2
1
2
3
4
3. Within fourteen days of service of this order plaintiff shall file his response to
defendants’ motion for summary judgment. No further extensions of time will be granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: November 30, 2018
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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?