United States of America v. Warner

Filing 46

ORDER (1) DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 40 the Government's Motion for Summary Judgment, (2) DIRECTING the parties to submit a joint statement of undisputed facts, and (3) CONTINUING dates. See order for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler on 2/8/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order)(lblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/8/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

Northern District of California

10

San Francisco Division
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

Plaintiff,

13
14

v.
PAUL J. WARNER,

15

Defendant.

No. C 11-04181 LB
ORDER (1) DENYING WITHOUT
PREJUDICE THE GOVERNMENT’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT, (2) DIRECTING THE
PARTIES TO SUBMIT A JOINT
STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED
FACTS, AND (3) CONTINUING
DATES

16
[Re: ECF No. 40]
17
18

_____________________________________/
Plaintiff United States of America (the “Government”) sued defendant Paul Warner, who is

19

proceeding pro se, alleging that Mr. Warner defaulted on student loans that are guaranteed by and

20

assigned to the United States. Complaint, ECF No. 1 at 1.1 On January 31, 2013, the Government

21

filed a motion for summary judgment. Motion, ECF No. 40. What was not filed, though, was a joint

22

statement of undisputed facts, which is required by the undersigned’s standing order. The standing

23

order, which is available on the court’s website and also is attached to this order, provides:

24
25

11. Motions for summary judgment shall be accompanied by a joint statement of the
material facts that the parties agree are not in dispute. The joint statement shall
include – for each undisputed fact – citations to admissible evidence. The parties
shall comply with the procedures set forth in Civil Local Rule 56-2(b). The parties

26
27
1

28

Citations are to the Electronic Case File (“ECF”) with pin cites to the electronic page
number at the top of the document, not the pages at the bottom.
C 11-04181 LB
ORDER

may not file – and the Court will not consider – separate statements of undisputed
facts. Failure to stipulate to an undisputed fact without a reasonable basis for doing so
may result in sanctions. See Civil L. R. 56-2(b).

1
2
3

Standing Order for United States Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler (effective January 4, 2013) at 4

4

(Section E, titled “Summary Judgment Motions”), available at http://cand.uscourts.gov/lborders

5

(emphasis added). For this reason alone, the court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the

6

Government’s motion. The Government may file another motion for summary judgment after the

7

parties file a joint statement of undisputed facts. The parties shall meet and confer regarding the

8

joint statement of undisputed facts by February 18, 2013, and they shall file the joint statement of

9

undisputed fact no later than February 21, 2013. The Government shall file any new motion for
summary judgment no later than February 21, 2013, and the motion shall be noticed for hearing on

11

April 4, 2013 at 11:00 a.m.

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

As the court assumes that the parties will file a joint statement of undisputed facts and that the

13

Government will file a new motion for summary judgment, the court notes that, although the

14

Government did provide at least a partial version of the facts, see Motion, ECF No. 40 at 3-8,

15

Government stated, “For a more complete statements of the facts, the Court is directed to the

16

Declaration of Rubio Canlas in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment (CANLAS

17

DEC., hereafter), filed herewith,” id. at 2-3. Given that it is it is the moving party’s ultimate burden

18

to persuad the court that there is “no genuine dispute as to any material fact and that the movant is

19

entitled to judgment as a matter of law,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a), and also that the court “is not

20

obligated to consider matters not specifically brought to its attention,” see Schwarzer, Tashima &

21

Wagstaffe, Cal. Prac. Guide: Fed. Civ. Proc. Before Trial § 14.145.2 (Rutter Group 2013), the court

22

instructs the Government to include in the fact section of its motion all of the facts it wants the court

23

to be aware of. To allow a party to simply refer to additional facts set forth in a declaration would

24

allow that party to circumvent the page limitations that apply to motions. See N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 7-

25

2(b).

26
27

In light of this order, the court CONTINUES the remaining dates, including the trial date, as
follows:

28
C 11-04181 LB
ORDER

2

1
2

Case Event

Filing Date/Disclosure
Deadline/Hearing Date

3

Last hearing date for dispositive motions and/or further case
management conference

4/4/2013, at 11:00 a.m.

4

Meet and confer re pretrial filings

4/30/2013

5

Pretrial filings due

5/9/2013

6

Oppositions, Objections, Exhibits, and Depo Designations due

5/16/2013

7

Final Pretrial Conference

5/30/2013, at 10:30 a.m.

Trial

6/10/2013, at 8:30 a.m.

Length of Trial

1 day

8
9
10

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 8, 2013
_______________________________
LAUREL BEELER
United States Magistrate Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
C 11-04181 LB
ORDER

3