Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02993/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-02993-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL SALISBURY,

Plaintiff,

 v.

DETECTIVE MICHAEL WARD, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C-06-2993 MMC

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

RE: RULE 56(f) MOTION; SETTING

DEADLINE TO FILE RULE 36(b)

MOTION; VACATING HEARING ON

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(Docket No. 95)

Before the Court is defendants’ motion, filed May 8, 2007, for summary judgment. 

On June 4, 2007, plaintiff filed, pursuant to Rule 56(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, a motion for a continuance of the deadline to file opposition to the motion for

summary judgment, on the grounds that plaintiff first must (1) move, pursuant to Rule 36(b)

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to set aside his deemed admissions to defendants’

requests for admission, and (2) obtain a copy of the deposition of his own expert. Because

plaintiff’s Rule 56(f) motion was untimely filed after defendants filed their reply in support of

their motion for summary judgment, defendants have not had an opportunity to respond to

plaintiff’s motion.

Accordingly,

1. No later than June 20, 2007, defendants shall file a response to plaintiff’s Rule

56(f) motion. The Rule 56(f) motion shall stand submitted as of said date unless the Court

after reviewing defendant’s response, determines that further briefing or argument is

Case 3:06-cv-02993-MMC Document 97 Filed 06/08/07 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

necessary.

2. No later than June 15, 2007, plaintiff shall file any motion for relief under Rule

36(b), and notice said motion before Magistrate Judge Zimmerman.

3. The June 15, 2007 hearing on defendants’ motion for summary judgment is

hereby VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 8, 2007 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-02993-MMC Document 97 Filed 06/08/07 Page 2 of 2