Conerly et al v. Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors et al

Filing 29

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)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5

RODNEY J. CONERLY,
Plaintiff,

6
7
8
9

Case No. 16-cv-03168-MEJ (PR)

v.
LAURIE SMITH, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT
PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR DELAYED RULING ON
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Re: Dkt. No. 26

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

Plaintiff has filed a motion to delay ruling on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

12

Plaintiff asserts that he is still awaiting discovery, through which he “seeks the necessary facts to

13

overcome summary judgment.” Dkt. No. 26 at 1. Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED without

14

prejudice. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is due on or before January 31, 2017.

15

Plaintiff’s opposition is due within twenty-eight days of the date the summary judgment motion is

16

filed. If he determines at that time that necessary facts are unavailable to him due to lack of

17

discovery, Plaintiff may, along with his opposition, file a declaration pursuant to Federal Rule of

18

Civil Procedure 56(d). Rule 56(d) provides that if a party opposing a summary judgment motion

19

shows “by affidavit or declaration that, for specified reasons, it cannot present facts essential to

20

justify its opposition, the court may (1) defer considering the motion or deny it; (2) allow time to

21

obtain affidavits or declarations or to take discovery; or (3) issue any other appropriate order. Fed.

22

R. Civ. P. 56(d).

23

This order terminates Docket No. 26.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25

Dated: January 6, 2017

26
27
28

MARIA-ELENA JAMES
United States Magistrate Judge