Opinion
1:18-cv-01623-JLT-SKO (PC)
10-31-2022
JARED M. VILLERY, Plaintiff, v. D. CROUNSE, et al., Defendants.
ORDER LIFTING STAY ON SUMMARY JUDGMENT BRIEFING
ORDER SETTING 21-DAY DEADLINE FOR THE FILING OF PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION
SHEILA K. OBERTO, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
I. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On August 16, 2021, Defendant D. Crounse filed a motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative, for partial summary judgment. (Doc. 88.) That same date, Defendants E. Garcia, R. Groves, A. Guerrero, T. Haak and K. Holland filed a motion for summary judgment and an amended memorandum in support of the motion. (Docs. 89 & 91.)
On August 19, 2021, the undersigned issued an Order Staying Briefing on Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 94.) At that time, Plaintiff's motion to compel the production of documents from Defendant Crounse was pending before the Court and the discovery at issue could have been relevant for purposes of Plaintiff's opposition to summary judgment. (Id.) Thus, briefing was stayed pending the outcome of Plaintiff's motion to compel. (Id.)
On October 29, 2021, the undersigned issued an Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents from Defendant Crounse. (Doc. 104.) Plaintiff moved for reconsideration on December 16, 2021. (Doc. 108.) Defendant Crounse filed an opposition (Doc. 112), and Plaintiff filed a reply (Doc. 117).
On April 19, 2022, District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston filed an Order Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration of Magistrate Judge's Ruling. (Doc. 120.)
On May 24, 2022, the undersigned issued an Order granting Plaintiff's motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order, extending the deadlines for the filing of pre-trial dispositive motions and setting a deadline for limited discovery. (Doc. 123.) Plaintiff was afforded an opportunity to engage in discovery with Defendants Holland and Groves only; the deadline for the completion of all discovery was set for August 18, 2022, and the deadline for the filing of pretrial dispositive motions was set for October 17, 2022. (Id. at 8.) Briefing on Defendants' motions for summary judgment was stayed until August 18, 2022, and Plaintiff was directed to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition 21 days later. (Id. at 8-9.)
On August 25, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion to modify the discovery and scheduling order. (Doc. 128.) Defendants Garcia, Groves, Guerrero, Haak and Holland filed a notice of non-opposition. (Doc. 129.)
On August 29, 2022, the undersigned issued an Order Granting in Part Plaintiff's Motion to Modify the Discovery and Scheduling Order. (Doc. 130.) The Court ordered Plaintiff to file any motions to compel regarding the limited discovery permitted with Defendants Holland and Groves by no later than September 19, 2022. The stay in summary judgment briefing was to “remain in effect until the Court has resolved the anticipated discovery motions.” (Id. at 2.) Deadlines for Plaintiff's opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendants' pending motions for summary judgment were to be set following resolution of the anticipated discovery motions. (Id.)
II. DISCUSSION
Plaintiff was to file any motion to compel concerning the limited discovery permitted with Defendants Holland and Groves no later than September 19, 2022. Plaintiff did not file any discovery motion, and the time for doing so has now passed. Discovery is now closed and the previously imposed stay concerning briefing on the pending motions for summary judgment will be lifted.
Plaintiff is cautioned that he should follow Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and Local Rule 260 when opposing Defendants' pending motions for summary judgment. (See also Doc. 88-1 [Rand warning] & Doc. 89-1 [Rand warning].)
Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1998).
III. CONCLUSION AND ORDER
For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The previously imposed stay on the pending motions for summary judgment is LIFTED; and
2. Plaintiff SHALL file his separate opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant Crounse, and to the motion for summary judgment filed by Defendants Garcia, Groves, Guerrero, Haak and Holland, no later than 21 days following the date of service of this order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.