Conerly et al v. Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors et al
ORDER by Magistrate Judge Maria-Elena James denying 26 Motion for Delayed Ruling on Summary Judgment. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(rmm2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/6/2017)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RODNEY J. CONERLY,
Case No. 16-cv-03168-MEJ (PR)
LAURIE SMITH, et al.,
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT
PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR DELAYED RULING ON
Re: Dkt. No. 26
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Plaintiff has filed a motion to delay ruling on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
Plaintiff asserts that he is still awaiting discovery, through which he “seeks the necessary facts to
overcome summary judgment.” Dkt. No. 26 at 1. Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED without
prejudice. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is due on or before January 31, 2017.
Plaintiff’s opposition is due within twenty-eight days of the date the summary judgment motion is
filed. If he determines at that time that necessary facts are unavailable to him due to lack of
discovery, Plaintiff may, along with his opposition, file a declaration pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 56(d). Rule 56(d) provides that if a party opposing a summary judgment motion
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 other appropriate order. Fed.
R. Civ. P. 56(d).
This order terminates Docket No. 26.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 6, 2017
United States Magistrate Judge
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?