Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04179/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-04179-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 730
Nature of Suit: Labor Management Report &amp; Disclosure
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WENDELL STACY ELAM,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH

PLAN, et al.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C05-4179 BZ

ORDER CONTINUING HEARING ON

DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

 Plaintiff has failed to file an opposition to defendants’

motions for summary judgment presently scheduled to be heard

September 6, 2006. Plaintiff is advised that "[t]he

defendants have made a motion for summary judgment by which

they seek to have your case dismissed. A motion for summary

judgment under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

will, if granted, end your case. Rule 56 tells you what you

must do in order to oppose a motion for summary judgment. 

Generally, summary judgment must be granted when there is no

genuine issue of material fact--that is, if there is no real

dispute about any fact that would affect the result of your

case, the party who asked for summary judgment is entitled to

judgment as a matter of law, which will end your case. When a

Case 3:05-cv-04179-BZ Document 70 Filed 08/18/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

party you are suing makes a motion for summary judgment that

is properly supported by declarations (or other sworn

testimony), you cannot simply rely on what your complaint

says. Instead, you must set out specific facts in

declarations, depositions, answers to interrogatories, or

authenticated documents, as provided in Rule 56(e), that

contradict the facts shown in the defendant’s declarations and

documents and show that there is a genuine issue of material

fact for trial. If you do not submit your own evidence in

opposition, summary judgment, if appropriate, may be entered

against you. If summary judgment is granted, your case will

be dismissed and there will be no trial." Rand v. Rowland,

154 F.3d 952, 963 (9th Cir. 1998).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendants’ motions for

summary judgment scheduled for September 6, 2006, are

CONTINUED to September 20, 2006 at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom G,

15th Floor, Federal Building, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San

Francisco, California 94102. Plaintiff shall file an

opposition by August 30, 2006. Defendants’ replies are due no

later than September 6, 2006. 

If plaintiff continues to proceed without an attorney, he

may wish to consult a manual the Court has adopted to assist

pro se litigants in presenting their case. This manual is 

available in the Clerk’s Office and online at 

http://www.cand.uscourts.gov.

Dated: August 18, 2006

 Bernard Zimmerman

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-04179-BZ Document 70 Filed 08/18/06 Page 2 of 2