Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00986/USCOURTS-caed-1_08-cv-00986-33/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VALENTINE E. UNDERWOOD,

Plaintiff,

vs.

M. KNOWLES, et al.,

Defendants. 

________________________________/

1:08-cv-00986-GSA-PC

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT

PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO SUBMIT

THREE AFFIDAVITS IN SUPPORT OF

AMENDED OPPOSITION TO MOTION

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(Doc. 142.)

I. BACKGROUND

Valentine Underwood ("Plaintiff") is a prisoner proceeding pro se with this civil rights

action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on July

17, 2008. (Doc. 1.) This action now proceeds on the original Complaint, against defendants

Correctional Officer (“C/O”) M. Northcutt and C/O S. Martin for retaliation, in violation of the

First Amendment; and against defendants C/O M. Northcutt, C/O S. Martin, C/O D. Caviness, C/O

A. Trujillo, and C/O P. Truitt, ("Defendants") for use of excessive force, in violation of the Eighth

Amendment. The parties have consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1

Defendant Seth Lantz was dismissed from this action on July 18, 2011, via Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss.

1

(Doc. 107.) Defendant J. Fambrough was dismissed from this action on December 9, 2011, via Plaintiff's motion to

dismiss. (Doc. 121.) All other claims and defendants were dismissed by the Court on October 21, 2009, based on

1

Case 1:08-cv-00986-BAM Document 143 Filed 10/19/12 Page 1 of 3
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

§ 636(c), and on June 15, 2011, this case was reassigned to the undersigned for all further

proceedings. (Docs. 4, 97, 102.)

Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on February 17, 2012. (Doc. 122.) On

April 26, 2012, Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion. (Doc. 127.) On May 18, 2012,

Defendants filed a reply to the opposition. (Doc. 131.)

On September 18, 2012, Plaintiff withdrew his opposition, and on September 24, 2012,

Plaintiff filed an amended opposition. (Docs. 138, 139, 141.) On September 28, 2012, Defendants

filed a reply to the amended opposition. (Doc. 140.)

On October 15, 2012, Plaintiff filed a request for the Court to allow him to submit three

affidavits in support of his amended opposition. (Doc. 142.) Plaintiff’s request is now before the

Court. 

II. PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST

Plaintiff explains that Defendants claimed, in their reply of September 28, 2012, that

Plaintiff failed to submit three affidavits -- of Zimena Underwood, Tracy Underwood, and Joy

Haskins -- in support of his amended opposition. Plaintiff asserts that he intended to submit the

three affidavits as Exhibits 14-16, and if he inadvertently failed to submit them, he requests the

Court to allow submission of the affidavits now.

Plaintiff’s request is moot, because the record shows that Plaintiff submitted the three

affidavits of Zimena Underwood, Tracy Underwood, and Joy Haskins on September 24, 2012, as

Exhibits 14-16 in support of his amended opposition. (Doc. 141 at 63-68 [Exhs. 14-16].) Plaintiff

is not required to submit the exhibits again. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request shall be denied as

moot.

///

///

///

Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. (Doc. 31.)

2

Case 1:08-cv-00986-BAM Document 143 Filed 10/19/12 Page 2 of 3
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

III. CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s request, filed on

October 15, 2012, for the Court to allow submission of three affidavits in support of Plaintiff’s

amended opposition to Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, is DENIED AS MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: October 19, 2012 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3

Case 1:08-cv-00986-BAM Document 143 Filed 10/19/12 Page 3 of 3