Truschke v. Zufall, et al

Filing 57

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 06/28/17 ordering that defendants February 17, 2017, and June 5, 2017, motions for summary judgment 47 , 54 are denied without prejudice to their renewal within seven (7) days from the date of this order. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JAMES EDWARD TRUSCHKE, Jr.,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:15-cv-0701 DB P

v.

ORDER

JOHN ZUFALL, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights

17
18

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter proceeds on plaintiff’s original complaint on an

19

excessive force claim, a mail interference and tampering claim, and a retaliation claim.
Pending before the court are two motions for summary judgment filed by the defendants,

20
21

each of which argues in part that plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. (ECF

22

Nos. 47, 54.) Neither of these motions, however, is accompanied by a “notice of what is required

23

of [plaintiff] in order to oppose” the summary judgment motions, which was supposed to be filed

24

concurrent with those motions. See Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934, 939-41 (9th Cir. 2012); Rand

25

v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 962-63 (9th Cir. 1998). Defendants’ failure to provide these

26

concurrent notices is fatal to the pending motions.

27

////

28

////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants’ February 17, 2017, and June 5,

2

2017, motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 47, 54) are denied without prejudice to their

3

renewal within seven (7) days from the date of this order.

4

Dated: June 28, 2017

5
6
7
8
9
10

/DLB7;
DB/Inbox/Substantive/trus0701.msj.rand

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2