Winans v. Thomas et al

Filing 77

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb, on 4/17/2013, DENYING Plaintiff's 73 Motion. Defendants shall have 14 days from the date of this order to reply re their 65 Motion for Summary Judgment. (Replies due by 5/1/2013.) (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA CORY WINANS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) vs. ) ) CCS. THOMAS, ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________ ) 3:12-cv-00095-RCJ-WGC MINUTES OF THE COURT April 17, 2013 PRESENT: THE HONORABLE WILLIAM G. COBB, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEPUTY CLERK: KATIE LYNN OGDEN REPORTER: NONE APPEARING COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF(S): NONE APPEARING COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT(S): NONE APPEARING MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS: Before the court is Plaintiff’s “Motion to Compell (sic) Discovery - Motion to Strike Summary Judgment as Discovery is Pending.” (Doc. # 73.) Defendant has opposed (Doc. # 74). The court will address the two components of Plaintiff’s motion separately. Motion to Compel With regard to the motion to compel, Plaintiff has not attached the discovery which is in dispute. The Local Rules for the District of Nevada require all discovery motions to state the efforts movant first undertook to resolve the discovery dispute which is the subject of the motion. LR 267(b). While this particular requirement may be difficult for a plaintiff who is a pro se inmate to satisfy, Plaintiff has also not complied with LR 26-7(a) which requires the motion to compel to “set forth in full the text of the discovery originally sought and the response thereto, if any.” Because of Plaintiff failure to comply with the requirements of Rule 26-7(a), it is impossible for the court to grant any relief. Therefore, the discovery component of Plaintiff’s motion to compel is DENIED. /// MINUTES OF THE COURT 3:12-cv-00095-RCJ-WGC Date: April 17, 2013 Page 2 Motion to Strike Plaintiff seeks to strike Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 65), seemingly on the grounds that Plaintiff disputes the discovery which has been produced by Defendants (Doc. # 73 at 1). Plaintiff seems to also contend that (at the time Plaintiff’s motion was filed), the discovery deadline had not passed. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(b), a motion for summary judgment may be filed at any time until 30 days after the close of all discovery. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is therefore timely and there are no legitimate grounds raised by Plaintiff to strike Defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff’s motion to strike (Doc. # 73) is DENIED. However, because this filing, liberally interpreted, appears to assert an argument in response to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, this court will consider Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. #73) to constitute a memorandum of points and authorities in response to Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (to date, Plaintiff has not filed any opposing memoranda to Defendant’s motion for summary. Defendant shall have fourteen (14) days from the date of this order to file a reply memorandum. IT IS SO ORDERED. LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK By: /s/ Deputy Clerk

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?