Brewer v. Ross et al

Filing 52

ORDER AND MEMORANDUM DECISION re 34 Motion: the court has decided to treat the motion as one for summary judgment. Parties are to supplement the briefing accordingly. Signed by Judge Tena Campbell on 10/18/17 (alt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
NORTHERN DIVISION

JORDAN ALAN NEVES BREWER,
Plaintiff,

ORDER and
MEMORANDUM DECISION

vs.

JEFFREY ROSS & TREVOR PETERSON,

Case No. 1:15-cv-87-TC-DBP

Defendants.

On March 27, 2017, Defendant Jeffrey Ross filed a Motion to Dismiss, or, in the
Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment. (See ECF No. 34.) The Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure provide the following:
If, on a motion under Rule 12(b)(6) or 12(c), matters outside the pleadings are
presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion must be treated as one for
summary judgment under Rule 56. All parties must be given a reasonable
opportunity to present all the material that is pertinent to the motion.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(d). Mr. Ross not only titled his motion in the alternative, but he also attached
documentation falling outside the complaint. Accordingly, the court has decided to treat the
motion as one for summary judgment.
To that end, pro se Plaintiff Jordan Brewer is hereby allowed to supplement his
opposition to the motion with evidence outside the complaint. Any relevant and admissible
information he believes the court should review before ruling on Mr. Ross’s motion should be
submitted to this court no later than November 8, 2017. Mr. Ross may then file a reply to the
information, if any, that Mr. Brewer submits. Mr. Ross’s reply is due no later than November 22,

2017.
SO ORDERED this 18th day of October, 2017.
BY THE COURT:

TENA CAMPBELL
U.S. District Court Judge

2