Opinion
Case No. CV 09-09374 AHM (AJWx)
09-13-2011
BRUCE LISKER v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al.
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Present: The Honorable A. HOWARD MATZ, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Stephen Montes
Deputy Clerk
Not Reported
Court Reporter / Recorder
___
Tape No.
Attorneys NOT Present for Plaintiffs:
Attorneys NOT Present for Defendants: Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS (No Proceedings Held)
The Court has looked at the issues and arguments that the parties addressed or made in their respective papers relating to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. (Dkt. No. 90.) Given what transpired at yesterday's status conference and the high likelihood that some (perhaps many) of the parties' contentions will also be addressed in their forthcoming motions in limine, and further given that it is likely that at least some of the rulings on those motions in limine will clarify the nature of this dispute and of any trial, it would be ill-advised for the Court to devote further efforts to ruling on the pending Motion for Summary Judgment.
Accordingly, the Court DENIES without prejudice Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants may renew that motion or file a different and presumably far more streamlined and focused motion sometime before trial, but after the motions in limine have been decided.
Dkt. No. 90.
___ : ___
Initials of Preparer SMO