Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-00163/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-00163-6/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

JASON SCOTT HOUNIHAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOSE C. VILLASENOR,

Defendant.

No. 1:23-cv-00163-EPG (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

(ECF No. 25)

Plaintiff Jason Scott Hounihan is a prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in 

this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This case proceeds on Plaintiff’s Eighth 

Amendment sexual assault claim against Defendant Villasenor. (ECF No. 5). The Court has not 

yet opened discovery and is waiting for the parties to file their scheduling and discovery 

statements before entering a case schedule. (ECF No. 23).

On May 10, 2023, Plaintiff submitted a filing that included a motion for summary 

judgment. (ECF No. 11). The Court denied the motion for summary judgment as premature and 

“without prejudice to Plaintiff re-filing the motion in compliance with this Court’s local rules and 

after discovery has been opened.” (ECF No. 12, p. 2). 

Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s “renewed” motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 

25, p. 1) (alternation to spelling). The Court will deny Plaintiff’s renewed motion, without 

prejudice. Contrary to the Court’s prior order, Plaintiff has renewed his motion for summary 

Case 1:23-cv-00163-KES-EPG Document 27 Filed 07/21/23 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

judgment despite discovery not having yet opened. Moreover, Plaintiff’s motion does not comply 

with this Court’s Local Rules. Under Local Rule 260(a), “[e]ach motion for summary judgment 

or summary adjudication shall be accompanied by a ‘Statement of Undisputed Facts’ that shall 

enumerate discretely each of the specific material facts relied upon in support of the motion and 

cite the particular portions of any pleading, affidavit, deposition, interrogatory answer, admission, 

or other document relied upon to establish that fact. The moving party shall be responsible for the 

filing of all evidentiary documents cited in the moving papers.” However, Plaintiff has failed to 

file a “Statement of Undisputed Facts.” 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s renewed motion for summary judgment 

(ECF No. 25) is denied, without prejudice, to Plaintiff re-filing the motion in compliance with 

this Court’s Local Rules and after discovery has been opened. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 20, 2023 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:23-cv-00163-KES-EPG Document 27 Filed 07/21/23 Page 2 of 2