Jimenez et al v. County of Alameda

Filing 67

ORDER RE: SECOND MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND REQUEST FOR TIME TO COMPLETE ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY by Charles R. Breyer. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/1/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14

LEILANI JIMENEZ, individually, and as
successor-in-interest for Decedent DENNIS
JIMENEZ; J.J., a minor, by and through his
guardian ad litem Leilani Jimenez; D.J., a minor,
by and through her guardian ad litem Leilani
Jimenez, and DENNIS JIMENEZ, Jr. an
individual; DENISE GAINES, an individual; and
ANITA JIMENEZ, an individual,

No. C 13-04620 CRB
ORDER RE: SECOND MOTION FOR
PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND
REQUEST FOR TIME TO COMPLETE
ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY

15
Plaintiff,
16
v.
17
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, et al.,
18
Defendant.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

/

Defendant has again moved for partial summary judgment.1 See Motion (dkt. 61).
Plaintiff again requests additional discovery under Rule 56(d), and just as before, Plaintiff
fails to submit an affidavit or declaration in support of its request as required by Rule 56(d).
See Response (dkt. 65) at 10; Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d) ("If a nonmovant shows by affidavit or
declaration that, for specified reasons, it cannot present facts essential to justify its
opposition, the court may: (1) defer considering the motion or deny it; (2) allow time to
obtain affidavits or declarations or to take discovery; or (3) issue any appropriate order.”).

27
28

1

Plaintiff had noted in response to Defendants' last partial motion for summary judgment that
discovery in this matter is not closed and that Plaintiff wished to depose additional witnesses. See
Response (dkt. 38) at 9. The Court granted Plaintiff's Rule 56(d) request for discovery and denied
Defendant's motion for summary judgment without prejudice. See Order (dkt. 54).

1

Plaintiff is ORDERED to submit such an affidavit no later than Friday, February 5,

2

2016. In that affidavit, Plaintiff must clearly explain how it has "diligently [pursued]

3

discovery before summary judgment." See Mackey v. Pioneer Nat. Bank, 867 F.2d 520, 524

4

(9th Cir. 1989). Additionally, Plaintiff is ORDERED to explain why it has not yet conducted

5

the discovery it argues is required here, given that the Court dismissed Defendants' last

6

partial motion for summary judgment on October 5, 2015.

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8
9

Dated: February 1, 2016
CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2