James v. Oakland Police Department et al

Filing 55

SCHEDULING ORDER (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 5/5/2015)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

DENNIS LAMAR JAMES, JR.,

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

No. C 13-011 SI (pr)

Plaintiff,

SCHEDULING ORDER

v.
OAKLAND POLICE DEPT.; et al.,

12

Defendants.
/

13
14

In this pro se civil rights action, plaintiff has sued several Oakland police officers and the

15

City of Oakland for the use of excessive force during his arrest on February 19, 2012, and has

16

sued several doctors for deliberate indifference to his medical needs during his hospital visit after

17

his arrest. In a separate order filed today, the court has lifted the stay of this action that has been

18

in place since July 1, 2014. See Docket # 39. It is now time to resume efforts toward the

19

resolution of plaintiff's claims.

20

At the time this action was stayed, several things were in progress: First, plaintiff needed

21

to file an amended complaint with regard to the claim against Dr. English, Dr. Adler, and Dr.

22

Kang (collectively, the "doctor-defendants") because the court had granted their motion to

23

dismiss for failure to state a claim. Second, Dr. Liu had filed a motion for summary judgment

24

as to which plaintiff had not yet filed an opposition. Third, the law enforcement defendants had

25

filed an answer but had not yet filed a dispositive motion. The court now sets the following

26

schedule, with the amendment to the complaint due first because it requires little or no legal

27

research:

28

1

A.

Amendment to Complaint:
1.

2

The clerk will send to plaintiff a copy of the order of service, the "order (1)

3

granting doctor-defendants' motion to dismiss and (2) addressing scheduling matters," and his

4

complaint. Docket # 6, # 35 and # 38.
2.

5

No later than June 5, 2015, plaintiff must file an amendment to his complaint, in

which he cures the deficiencies discussed in the order granting the doctor-defendants' motion to

7

dismiss, Docket # 35.

8

amended complaint because he only needs to fix one part of the complaint. An amendment to

9

the complaint will be read together with the complaint, whereas an amended complaint would

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

6

supersede the original complaint and any claim not repeated therein would be dismissed. Failure

11

to file an amendment by the deadline will result in the dismissal of Dr. English, Dr. Adler, and

12

Dr. Kang.

Plaintiff should file an amendment to his complaint rather than an

13
14
15

B.

Dr. Liu's Motion For Summary Judgment
1.

No later than May 18, 2015, Dr. Liu must file and serve his motion for summary

16

judgment.1 At the time he serves his motion for summary judgment, Dr. Liu must also serve on

17

plaintiff (but need not file with the court) a copy of each and every statute, rule and case cited

18

in his memorandum of points and authorities in support of his motion for summary judgment.

19

2.

No later than June 26, 2015, plaintiff must file and serve on defense counsel his

20

opposition to Dr. Liu's motion for summary judgment. In preparing his opposition, plaintiff is

21

cautioned to read the notice and warning about motions for summary judgment at pages 5-6 of

22

the order of service.

23

3.

No later than July 10, 2015, Dr. Liu must file and serve his reply brief, if any.

24
25
26
27

1

Upon staying this action, the court dismissed Dr. Liu's motion for summary judgment
without prejudice to Dr. Liu refiling it after the stay was lifted. See Docket # 39 at 2-3. For
28 docketing purposes, he needs to file the motion again, even if it is a copy of the originally-filed
motion.
2

1
2

C.

Law Enforcement Defendants' Dispositive Motion
1.

No later than June 26, 2015, the law enforcement defendants (including the

3

municipality) must file and serve their motion for summary judgment. At the time they serve

4

their motion for summary judgment, the law enforcement defendants must also serve on plaintiff

5

(but need not file with the court) a copy of each and every statute, rule and case cited in their

6

memorandum of points and authorities in support of his motion for summary judgment.

7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

2.

No later than July 31, 2015, plaintiff must file and serve on defense counsel his

opposition to the law enforcement defendants' motion for summary judgment.
3.

No later than August 14, 2015, Dr. Liu must file and serve his reply brief, if any.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 5, 2015

_______________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3