Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_17-cv-00328/USCOURTS-caed-1_17-cv-00328-23/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

EFREN DANIELLE BULLARD,

Plaintiff,

v.

BENSON, et al.

Defendants.

Case No. 1:17-cv-00328-NONE-JDP 

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

MISCELLANEOUS MOTION 

ECF No. 81 

Plaintiff Efren Bullard is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil rights 

action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 4, 2019, plaintiff filed a miscellaneous 

motion. ECF 81. While this motion is labeled as a “dispositive motion,” it does not seek any 

dispositive relief, and so we will not treat it as dispositive. See Andersen v. United States, 298 

F.3d 804, 807 (9th Cir. 2002) (“The substance of the motion, not its form, controls its

disposition.”). Dispositive motions typically seek to dispose of all or some claims in favor of 

the moving party. Instead, plaintiff’s motion argues that his own claims should not be 

dismissed at this stage in the litigation. See id. at 2 (“[P]laintiff will do the best he can on this 

dispositive motion to present the facts in this civil matter so that his claims will not be 

dismissed.”). Because defendants have no pending motions seeking dismissal, we are not 

currently considering dismissal of any of plaintiff’s claims. We will therefore deny plaintiff’s 

miscellaneous motion as unnecessary. 

We believe plaintiff may have operated under the assumption that he was required to file 

Case 1:17-cv-00328-DAD-HBK Document 84 Filed 02/04/20 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

a motion by the relevant dispositive-motion deadline. See id. at 1 (“Plaintiff had to look up the 

word ‘dispositive motion’ in the Blacks Law dictionary to find out what [he] was supposed to 

do in regards to a [Dispositive] Motion.”) (emphasis added). This is not the case; dispositive 

motions are not required. However, plaintiff should be aware that he suffers no prejudice from 

filing the motion or from having it denied as unnecessary. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 3, 2020 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

No. 205.

Case 1:17-cv-00328-DAD-HBK Document 84 Filed 02/04/20 Page 2 of 2