Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01088/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-01088-5/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAFAR AFSHAR,

NO. CIV. S-04-1088 LKK/JFM

Plaintiff,

v.

O R D E R

CITY OF SACRAMENTO; SACRAMENTO

POLICE DEPARTMENT; COUNTY OF

SACRAMENTO; SACRAMENTO COUNTY

SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; and SHERIFF

LOU BLANAS, individually and in his

official capacity as Sheriff of the

Sacramento County Sheriff’s Department,

Defendants.

 /

The court is in receipt of motions for summary judgement from

the Sacramento City and County defendants. The court is also in

receipt of plaintiff’s opposition to the motions for summary

judgement and plaintiff’s motion to amend the scheduling order and

complaint. Plaintiff seeks to amend the complaint by deleting as

parties defendants the City of Sacramento and the Sacramento Police

Department and adding an individual, Deputy Sheriff Spaid, who

allegedly initiated the excessive use of force. By virtue of the

Case 2:04-cv-01088-LKK -JFM Document 76 Filed 10/27/05 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

2

proposed first amended complaint, it is clear that plaintiff no

longer seeks to impose liability on the City of Sacramento and the

Sacramento City Police Department. Therefore, the City defendants

are dismissed and the Clerk is directed to enter judgment

accordingly. 

With respect to the County defendants, the County is directed

to file an opposition to the motion to amend the scheduling order

and complaint by 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 2, 2005. 

Plaintiff’s reply brief, if any, shall be filed not later than 4:30

p.m. on Monday, November 7, 2005. Thereafter, the matter will

stand submitted without oral argument. 

Ruling on the County defendants’ motion for summary judgement

is deferred pending resolution of the motion to amend. The hearing

originally scheduled for November 7, 2005 is vacated. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: October 27, 2005.

 /s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:04-cv-01088-LKK -JFM Document 76 Filed 10/27/05 Page 2 of 2