From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Velocity Tech. Sols.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 21, 2021
2:19-cv-02374-KJM-JDP (PS) (E.D. Cal. Jul. 21, 2021)

Opinion

2:19-cv-02374-KJM-JDP (PS)

07-21-2021

GARRISON JONES, Plaintiff, v. VELOCITY TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, Defendant.


ORDER STRIKING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

ECF No. 59

JEREMY D. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff seeks summary judgment on his FMLA claim. Plaintiff argues that defendant is estopped from arguing that his employment was not terminated while on FMLA leave, because the termination of his employment was decided in an Arizona state administrative proceeding. ECF No. 59. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is unsigned and does not contain full exhibits to support his allegations. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c), (e). The motion includes excerpts from documents mixed in with his arguments. See generally ECF No. 59. Plaintiff does not attach the state administrative decision that he claims has preclusive effect or provide any sworn statements to support his factual allegations. This unsigned motion must be struck. Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(a). Should plaintiff seek to refile a motion for summary judgment, he must sign his motion and include full exhibits of evidence that he relies upon to make his arguments.

Accordingly, the court strikes plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 59.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Jones v. Velocity Tech. Sols.

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 21, 2021
2:19-cv-02374-KJM-JDP (PS) (E.D. Cal. Jul. 21, 2021)
Case details for

Jones v. Velocity Tech. Sols.

Case Details

Full title:GARRISON JONES, Plaintiff, v. VELOCITY TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jul 21, 2021

Citations

2:19-cv-02374-KJM-JDP (PS) (E.D. Cal. Jul. 21, 2021)