Williams v. Sacramento Police Department et al

Filing 37

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 9/24/2014 DENYING plaintiff's 30 motion for summary judgment, without prejudice, to plaintiff filing a motion for summary judgment that complies with Local Rule 260 on or before 10/24/2014. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:13-cv-1929 CKD P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

SACRAMENTO POLICE
DEPARTMENT, et al,
Defendants.

16
17
18

On August 5, 2014, plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. Defendants’ object to

19

the motion based upon the fact that plaintiff has not provided the court with a “statement of

20

undisputed facts” as required by Local Rule 260. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY

21

ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 30) is denied without

22

prejudice to plaintiff filing a motion for summary judgment which complies with Local Rule 260

23

on or before October 24, 2014; the deadline for filing pretrial motions.

24

Dated: September 24, 2014

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

25
26
27
28

1
will1929.msj