Fernandez v. Frank et al

Filing 31

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 28 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 4/11/11. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Ambrose S. Fernandez, Jr. and Saturnino Gervacio served by first class mail at the addresses of record on April 11, 2011.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
AMBROSE S. FERNANDEZ, JR.,
Plaintiff,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

V.
DIRECTOR CLAYTON FRANK,
INSPECTOR NINO,
STATE SHERIFF PAUL McINTIRE,
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY,
DOES 1-10,
Defendants.

CIVIL NO. 10-00573 SOM/BMK
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On March 7, 2011, pro se Plaintiff Ambrose S.
Fernandez, Jr. (“Fernandez”) filed his second motion for summary
judgment.

See ECF No. 28.

This motion for summary judgment

concerns three incidents of alleged problems with handicapped
parking at the Honolulu International Airport.

Fernandez’s

Complaint, however, asserts claims arising out of efforts to
access the Hawaii State Supreme Court law library.

This court

finds this matter suitable for disposition without a hearing, see
Local Rule 7.2(d), and DENIES Fernandez’s motion for summary
judgment.
A complaint must notify a defendant as to what claims
are being brought.

Fernandez cannot bring a summary judgment

motion for a claim that was not mentioned in the Complaint.
Furthermore, the court does not see how all the named Defendants
in this action are responsible for the alleged incidents at the

airport.

In the summary judgment motion, Fernandez alleges that

the Department of Transportation Airports Division (“DOTA”)
violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the
Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines
(“ADAAG”).

But Defendants named in the caption are (1) Clayton

Frank, former Director of the Department of Public Safety, (2)
Inspector Nino, (3) Deputy State Sheriff Paul McIntire, who works
at the Hawaii Supreme Court building, and (4) the Department of
Public Safety.
The court has previously denied Fernandez summary
judgment because Fernandez failed to carry his burden as a
movant.

See ECF No. 19.

Fernandez asserted violations of the

ADA and ADAAG, but did not state what provisions were violated or
how they were violated.

Moreover, Fernandez did not identify

materials on file that demonstrated the absence of a genuine
issue of material fact.

See T.W. Elec. Serv., Inc. v. Pac. Elec.

Contractors Ass’n, 809 F.2d 626, 630 (9th Cir. 1987) (citation
omitted).
For the foregoing reasons, this court denies
Fernandez’s second request for summary judgment, but this order
does not preclude a properly supported and timely motion in the
future concerning the matters asserted in the Complaint.

If

Fernandez wishes to bring an motion for the acts that allegedly
occurred at the airport, he must file a new Complaint before

2

bringing a dispositive motion.

As stated in the court’s Order

Denying Motion for Reconsideration, see ECF No. 25, Fernandez is
advised to review Local Rule 56.1 for the proper procedures
regarding motions for summary judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, April 11, 2011.

/s/ Susan Oki Mollway
Susan Oki Mollway
Chief United States District Judge

Fernandez v. Frank, et al., Civ. No. 10-00573 SOM/BMK; ORDER DENYING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT.

3