Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01329/USCOURTS-caed-2_22-cv-01329-8/pdf.json

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

---

STIP AND ORDER ON EX PARTE MOTION FOR EARLY SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION (ECF 30)

MATTHEWS V. PINCHBACK, ET AL., CASE NO. 2:22-CV-1329 DJC KJN P

PAGE 1

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

JUSTICE 

FIRST

Jenny C. Huang, SBN 223596 Audra C. Call (SBN 252804)

JUSTICE FIRST Deputy Attorney General

180 Grand Avenue, Suite 1300 300 South Spring Street, Suite 1702

Oakland, CA 94612 Los Angeles, CA 90013-1230

Tel.: (510) 847-0485 Tel: (213) 269-6611

Fax: (510) 318-7701 Fax: (916) 761-3641

E-mail: jhuang@justicefirst.net E-mail: Audra.Call@doj.ca.gov

 

Attorney for Plaintiff Derek Matthews Attorney for Defendants J. Price, A. Tout,

And B. Sysombath

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEREK MATTHEWS

Plaintiff,

vs.

DEMITA PINCHBACK, et al., 

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 2:22-cv-1329 DJC KJN P 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

ON EX PARTE MOTION FOR EARLY 

SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION 

(ECF 30)

Judge: Hon. Kendall J. Newman

Courtroom: 25, 8th Floor

)

)

WHEREAS on December 9, 2022, Plaintiff’s prior counsel filed a motion to withdraw as 

Plaintiff’s counsel, based on a medical condition that required her withdrawal (ECF 21);

WHEREAS on December 27, 2022, Defendants Price, Tout, and Sysombath (collectively 

referred to as “CDCR Defendants” filed an ex parte motion for leave to file an early summary 

judgment motion on the issues of failure to exhaust administrative remedies and statute of 

limitations (ECF 30);

WHEREAS Plaintiff’s prior counsel filed an opposition brief to ex parte motion on 

December 29, 2022 (ECF 36);

Case 2:22-cv-01329-DJC-CSK Document 50 Filed 05/24/23 Page 1 of 3
STIP AND ORDER ON EX PARTE MOTION FOR EARLY SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION (ECF 30)

MATTHEWS V. PINCHBACK, ET AL., CASE NO. 2:22-CV-1329 DJC KJN P

PAGE 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

JUSTICE 

FIRST

WHEREAS the CDCR Defendants filed a reply brief to their ex parte motion on 

December 30, 2022 (ECF 37);

WHEREAS by this Court’s order, dated April 6, 2023, this case was reassigned to the 

Honorable Daniel J. Calabretta. (ECF 45.) The order stated that all pending motions were 

deemed submitted without appearance and without oral argument;

WHEREAS on April 26, 2023, Plaintiff’s present counsel was appointed as limited 

purpose counsel (ECF 46);

WHEREAS Plaintiff’s counsel has reviewed the prior briefing on the pending ex parte

motion and believes that this motion can be resolved by way of stipulation; 

WHEREAS the parties seek to resolve the pending ex parte motion without the need for 

further court intervention;

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the parties as follows:

1. Within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Court’s Order on the pending motion to 

dismiss by Defendant Pinchback (ECF 20), the CDCR Defendants may file and serve 

a motion for summary judgment exclusively on the issues of whether Plaintiff 

exhausted his administrative remedies prior to filing this action as required by the 

Prison Litigation Reform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) and whether this action is barred 

by the applicable statute of limitations;

2. Within thirty (30) days of any summary judgment filed by the CDCR Defendants, as 

described in ¶ 1 above, Plaintiff may file an opposition to the summary judgment 

and/or a motion for summary judgment by Plaintiff on the same issues identified in ¶ 

1 above;

3. After the CDCR Defendants file their summary judgment motion as described in ¶ 1 

above, the parties will meet and confer on whether an affirmative summary judgment 

motion by Plaintiff on the same issues is necessary; 

4. The CDCR Defendants may file a reply brief on their motion for summary judgment 

within fourteen (14) days after Plaintiff’s opposition is filed; 

Case 2:22-cv-01329-DJC-CSK Document 50 Filed 05/24/23 Page 2 of 3
STIP AND ORDER ON EX PARTE MOTION FOR EARLY SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION (ECF 30)

MATTHEWS V. PINCHBACK, ET AL., CASE NO. 2:22-CV-1329 DJC KJN P

PAGE 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

JUSTICE 

FIRST

5. Briefing on any summary judgment motion filed by Plaintiff shall comply with Local 

Rule 230; and

6. Any motions for summary judgment filed pursuant to this Stipulation shall not 

preclude any party from filing a subsequent motion for summary judgment on the 

merits of Plaintiff’s claims should the case proceed after a decision on the exhaustion 

and statute of limitations issues; and

7. All discovery in this matter, other than discovery directly related to the issues of 

exhaustion and statute of limitations, shall be stayed until a decision is issued on the 

motion(s) for summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and 

based upon the statute of limitations. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD:

Dated: May 15, 2023 JUSTICE FIRST

 Oakland, California

______/s/ Jenny Huang (as authorized on May 18, 2023)

Jenny C. Huang

Attorney for Plaintiff Derek Matthews

Dated: May 18, 2023 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA

Los Angeles, California

__________________________________

Audra C. Call

Deputy Attorney General

Attorney for Defendants Price, Tout and Sysombath

IT IS SO ORDERED. (ECF No. 30.)

Dated: May 24, 2023

/matt1329.stip

Case 2:22-cv-01329-DJC-CSK Document 50 Filed 05/24/23 Page 3 of 3