IntegrityMessageBoards.com v. Facebook, Inc.

Filing 166

ORDER RE 162 163 165 DEFENDANT'S PRE-DISCOVERY MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton. (pjhlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/16/2021)

Case 4:18-cv-05286-PJH Document 166 Filed 02/16/21 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

INTEGRITYMESSAGEBOARDS.COM,

v.

9
10

FACEBOOK, INC.,
Defendant.

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Case No. 18-cv-05286-PJH

Plaintiff,

8

ORDER RE DEFENDANT’S PREDISCOVERY MOTION FOR PARTIAL
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Re: Dkt. Nos. 162, 163, 165

12
13

The court is in receipt of defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment on

14

plaintiff’s claims for forward-looking injunctive and declaratory relief. Dkt. 162; Dkt. 161

15

(sealed version). In a footnote, defendant asserts that “[g]iven the limited nature of this

16

Motion, Facebook reserves the right to seek summary judgment on all of Plaintiff’s claims

17

at a later stage of the proceedings. Facebook recognizes that it must seek leave of Court

18

for any subsequent motion for summary judgment.” Dkt. 161-4 at 3 n.*.

19

As defendant is apparently aware, the court’s standing order generally permits

20

only one motion for summary judgment per side.1 The court reiterates that rule today.

21

Defendant may elect to proceed on the instant motion for partial summary judgment.

22

However, the court cautions defendant that, if it does so, the court will not permit it to file

23

another. Contrary to defendant’s suggestion, Rule 56 does not permit multiple motions

24

for summary judgment. The court further notes that the instant motion is not “limited” in

25

nature. Instead, it features a 30-page opening brief citing to multiple exhibits comprising

26

over 100 pages of information. Dkt. 161. It further appears that defendant is using this

27
28

1

https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/wp-content/uploads/judges/hamilton-pjh/PJH_CivilPretrial-Instructions.pdf

Case 4:18-cv-05286-PJH Document 166 Filed 02/16/21 Page 2 of 2

1

motion as a second attempt to accomplish what it failed to do on its recent motion to

2

dismiss. Compare Dkt. 147 (denying defendant’s request to dismiss plaintiff’s forward-

3

looking claims for equitable relief).

4

In the event defendant wishes to proceed with its early motion for partial summary

5

judgment, then the court GRANTS the parties’ stipulated briefing schedule as it pertains

6

to that motion. Dkt. 163. The court also GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the

7

parties’ stipulated briefing schedule as it pertains to any motion to seal filed by plaintiff.

8

Dkt. 165. Plaintiff may not, however, file a reply in support of such motion. Going

9

forward, the court will not permit a party to file a reply in support of a motion to seal.
Thus, in the event defendant proceeds with its motion for partial summary judgment, the

11

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

following briefing schedule applies:

12

•

Deadline for plaintiff to file opposition to partial MSJ: March 19, 2021.

13

•

Deadline for defendant to file reply in support of partial MSJ: April 2, 2021.

14

•

Deadline for plaintiff to file any motion to seal re the motion for partial MSJ:

15
16

February 22, 2021.
•

17
18

Deadline for defendant to file any opposition to plaintiff’s motion to seal: March 10,
2021.

•

Consolidated hearing on motions for partial MSJ, class certification, and any

19

motions to seal: May 13, 2021 (or at the court’s convenience).

20

Defendant may withdraw its motion for partial summary judgment within seven

21

days of this order. In the event it does, then the pending motion for class certification is

22

set for hearing via Zoom on April 29, 2021 at 1:30 pm (not April 28, 2021, as incorrectly

23

noticed by plaintiff).

24
25
26
27

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 16, 2021
/s/ Phyllis J. Hamilton
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge

28
2