Willis v. Kiser et al

Filing 79

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 66 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery, signed by Magistrate Judge J Richard Creatura. (GMR- cc: pltf)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

8
9
10

DARREL PATRICK WILLIS,

11

Plaintiff,

13

ORDER ON MOTION FOR
EXTENSION

v.

12

CASE NO. 3:17-cv-05373-BHS-JRC

NICK KISER, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15
16

The District Court has referred this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action to United States Magistrate

17

Judge J. Richard Creatura. Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s “Letter/Request for

18

Extension of Time to Complete Discovery,” which the Court interprets as a motion for extension.

19

Dkt. 66.

20

The Court notes that plaintiff filed his motion for extension before the Court entered its

21

report and recommendation addressing defendants’ motion for summary judgment. See Dkts. 66,

22

76. The Court should have addressed this motion before entering its report and recommendation,

23

but failed to do so because of an administrative error.

24

ORDER ON MOTION FOR EXTENSION - 1

1

Therefore, the Court has evaluated the motion in retrospect to determine if it would have

2

changed this Court’s recommendations in any way. After completing that analysis, this Court

3

concludes that it would have denied the motion even if it had made a ruling before entering its

4

report and recommendation, and, therefore, the Court is not extending the deadlines, or changing

5

its Report and Recommendation. Thus, plaintiff’s case was not prejudiced by the Court’s

6

oversight.

7

Plaintiff’s motion for extension appears to make two similar, but distinguishable,

8

requests. First, plaintiff appears to request additional time to respond to defendants pending

9

motion for summary judgment. Dkt. 66. However, plaintiff has now filed a response to the

10

motion for summary judgment, Dkt. 69, and the Court has already considered the response

11

before it entered a report and recommendation addressing the motion for summary judgment.

12

Dkt. 76. Therefore, insofar as plaintiff requested an extension to respond to the motion for

13

summary judgment, plaintiff’s motion is denied as moot.

14

Second, plaintiff asked that the Court stay defendants’ motion for summary judgment and

15

allow additional time for discovery. Dkt. 66. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) provides that

16

a non-moving party may seek a continuance of a summary judgment motion if the party shows

17

that, for specified reasons, it cannot present facts essential to justify opposition to the pending

18

summary judgment motion. The party requesting a continuance must show that: “(1) it has set

19

forth in affidavit form the specific facts it hopes to elicit from further discovery; (2) the facts

20

sought exist; and (3) the sought after facts are essential to oppose summary judgment.” Family

21

Home and Finance Center, Inc. v. Federal Home Loan Morg. Corp., 525 F.3d 822, 823 (9th Cir.

22

2008). Failure to comply with these requirements is a proper ground to deny discovery and

23
24

ORDER ON MOTION FOR EXTENSION - 2

1

proceed on summary judgment. See Weinberg v. Whatcom County, 241 F.3d 746, 751 (9th Cir.

2

2001).

3

Here, plaintiff failed to adhere to the requirements of Rule 56(d). He did not submit an

4

affidavit or declaration indicating what specific facts he hopes to elicit through additional

5

discovery, he did not explain why additional discovery was necessary to properly prepare an

6

opposition to summary judgment. See Dkt. 66. Rather, he has summarily requested that the Court

7

stay a decision as to defendants’ summary judgment motion until additional discovery can be

8

pursued. Thus, plaintiff failed to adhere to the requirements of Rule 56(d). Therefore, plaintiff’s

9

motion for extension is denied.

10

In light of this Court’s evaluation of plaintiff’s motion for extension, it is not inclined to

11

change any portion of the Report and Recommendation previously filed on December 28, 2019.

12

Dkt. 76.

13

Dated this 10th day of January, 2019.

14
15
16

A

17

J. Richard Creatura
United States Magistrate Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

ORDER ON MOTION FOR EXTENSION - 3