IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 19, 2012
MICHAEL BAKER, PLAINTIFF,
PEREZ, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 28, 2012, the undersigned recommended that defendants' summary judgment motion be granted in part and denied in part. On April 18, 2012, defendants filed a motion for leave to file a supplemental summary judgment motion. On May 29, 2012, the undersigned denied that request.
On July 20, 2012, the undersigned vacated the March 28, 2012 findings and recommendations and gave plaintiff notice of the requirements for opposing summary judgment motions pursuant to Woods v. Carey, 684 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2012). This order granted plaintiff twenty-one days to file either a new opposition, a supplemental opposition, or a statement that he relied on his previously filed opposition.
On August 13, 2012, plaintiff filed a supplemental opposition addressing the claims as to which the undersigned previously recommended that summary judgment for defendants be granted. After carefully reviewing plaintiff's supplemental opposition, the undersigned finds that plaintiff's exhibits and briefing have muddied the waters as to some claims.*fn1 For this reason, the undersigned has determined that it is in the court's best interest for defendants to file a renewed summary judgment motion addressing all claims.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants' summary judgment motion (Dkt. No. 71) is vacated;
2. Within thirty days of the date of this order, defendants shall file a comprehensive renewed summary judgment motion; plaintiff's opposition is due twenty-one days thereafter; defendants' reply is due seven days thereafter.