Martin v. Hedgpeth et al
Filing
80
ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 74 Motion to convert unemerated 12(b) motion to dismiss to a motion for summary jdugment under Rule 56; denying as moot 78 Motion for Extension of Time to File. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/8/2014)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
GEORGE MARTIN, H-90626,
Plaintiff(s),
13
14
15
16
v.
RANDY GROUNDS, Warden, et al.,
Defendant(s).
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. C 12-3193 CRB (PR)
ORDER
(Docket #74 & 78)
17
18
On February 14, 2014, defendants filed a dispositive motion consisting of
19
an unenumerated Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss for failure to exhaust available
20
administrative remedies and a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state
21
a claim upon which relief could be granted. The Ninth Circuit subsequently ruled
22
in Albino v. Baca, No. 10-55702, slip op. at 4-5, 12 (9th Cir. Apr. 3, 2014) (en
23
banc), that failure to exhaust available administrative remedies should be brought
24
in a motion for summary judgment in most cases. Defendants accordingly move
25
to convert their unenumerated Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss to a motion for
26
summary judgment under Rule 56. (They also have provided plaintiff with the
27
requisite concurrent Rand warning explaining what plaintiff has to do to ward off
28
summary judgment.)
1
Good cause shown, defendants’ motion (docket #74) to convert their
2
unemerated 12(b) motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment under
3
Rule 56 is GRANTED. By no later than June 6, 2014, plaintiff shall file an
4
opposition to defendants’ motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) and for
5
summary judgment under Rule 56, and defendants shall file a reply to plaintiff’s
6
opposition within 14 days thereafter.
7
8
9
By no later than June 6, 2014, plaintiff also shall file a reply to defendants’
opposition to plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief.
In view of the new briefing schedule set above, plaintiff’s motion (docket
10
#78) for an extension of time to file the relevant opposition and reply papers is
11
DENIED as moot.
12
No further extensions of time will be granted.
13
SO ORDERED.
14
DATED: May 7, 2014
CHARLES R. BREYER
United States District Judge
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
G:\PRO-SE\CRB\CR.12\Martin, G.12-3193.or4.wpd
27
28
2
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?