Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00542/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00542-25/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MATTHEW DENNIS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

SCOTT KERNAN, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:16-cv-0542 JAM AC P 

ORDER 

 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983, has filed a motion requesting that his opposition to defendants’ motion for summary 

judgment be considered as a motion for summary judgment. ECF No. 188. This request is 

construed as a motion for reconsideration of the March 8, 2022 order deeming plaintiff’s crossmotion for summary judgment as an opposition. 

Local Rule 230(j) requires that a motion for reconsideration state “what new or different 

facts or circumstances are claimed to exist which did not exist or were not shown upon such prior 

motion, or what other grounds exist for the motion; and . . . why the facts or circumstances were 

not shown at the time of the prior motion.” L.R. 230(j)(3)-(4). Plaintiff’s motion for 

reconsideration does not present any new or different facts or circumstances and will therefore be 

denied. The cross-motion for summary judgment will continue to be construed as an opposition 

to defendants’ motion for summary judgment for the reasons set forth in the March 8, 2022 order. 

Case 2:16-cv-00542-DAD-AC Document 189 Filed 03/28/22 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 

With respect to the other issues raised in the motion, plaintiff is advised that the court is 

aware of his response to defendants undisputed statement of facts and it will be considered when 

addressing the motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff’s request that the court return his motion 

for reconsideration will be denied. Though the court is sympathetic to plaintiff’s difficulties in 

obtaining copies, plaintiff has been advised and has acknowledged being advised that further 

requests to return documents would not be granted. If plaintiff would like copies from the court, 

any such requests must be accompanied by the required copy fees.1 Finally, to the extent plaintiff 

alleges further violations of his constitutional rights, if he wishes to pursue those claims, he must 

do so by initiating a separate complaint. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 188) is DENIED. 

2. Plaintiff’s request for his motion to be returned (ECF No. 188) is DENIED. 

DATED: March 25, 2022 

1

 The Clerk’s Office provides copies of documents at $0.50 per page. 

Case 2:16-cv-00542-DAD-AC Document 189 Filed 03/28/22 Page 2 of 2