San Agustin v. Scribner et al

Filing 23

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR A STAY OF DISCOVERY AND FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL; GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME AND DENYING HIS MOTION FOR STAY by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton granting 12 Motion to Seal; granting 18 Motion for Extension of Time to File; denying 19 Motion to Stay; granting 20 Motion to Stay (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service) (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/29/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. A.K. SCRIBNER, Warden; A. QUINONES, Institutional Gang Investigator, Defendants. / MICHAEL SAN AGUSTIN, Plaintiff, No. C 08-4660 PJH (PR) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS FOR A STAY OF DISCOVERY AND FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL; GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME AND DENYING HIS MOTION FOR STAY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION

United United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

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

This is a civil rights case filed pro se by a state prisoner. Defendants have filed a combined motion to dismiss and for summary judgment, which is not yet opposed. Plaintiff has moved for an extension of time to oppose the dispositive motion and for a "stay" of a ruling on the motions to allow him to complete discovery. Defendants have moved for a stay of discovery and for permission to file an exhibit under seal. Defendants' dispositive motion is based in part on a contention that plaintiff has failed to state a claim, and in part on a contention that they are entitled to qualified immunity. In a motion to dismiss these are issues that are decided by treating the factual allegations of the complaint as true, so discovery is unnecessary. The court will grant the stay of discovery and first rule on the motion to dismiss. If it is denied and the motion for summary judgment is not moot, plaintiff may move to lift the stay of discovery. The motion for a stay of discovery (document number 20 on the docket) is GRANTED. See CrawfordEl v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 598 (1998) (court should resolve qualified immunity issue before allowing discovery).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Plaintiff's motion to withhold ruling on the dispositive motion pending completion of discovery (document number 19) is DENIED. No further discovery is permitted pending further order of the court. Defendants' motion to file confidential exhibits A, B, and C under seal (document number 12) is GRANTED. The confidentially of the documents filed under seal shall be maintained by the court, and they shall remain under seal for seventy-five years before public release. Plaintiff's motion (document 18) for an extension of time to oppose defendants' dispositive motion is GRANTED. The deadline to oppose the motion is EXTENDED to a date thirty days from the date this order is entered. In view of narrowed issues here ­ the motion to dismiss will be considered first, and the motion for summary judgment will be ruled upon only if it is denied as moot ­ no further extensions will be granted. Defendants' reply, if any, is due fifteen days from the date the opposition is filed, and no extensions of that deadline will be granted. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 29, 2010 PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

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

P:\PRO-SE\PJH\CR.08\SANAGUSTIN4660.ext-p.wpd

2