Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-05748/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-05748-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

KERRY A. HERBERT, JR,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, et

al.,

Defendants. /

No. 08-05748 CW

ORDER EXTENDING

DEADLINE FOR

FILING MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Pursuant to Magistrate Judge Edward M. Chen’s Order Granting

Defendant’s Motion to Compel; Report and Recommendation Re Deadline

for Filing Motion for Summary Judgment,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the deadline for Defendant to file a

motion for summary judgment is extended to March 24, 2010. The

motion shall be supported by adequate factual documentation and

shall conform in all respects to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

56. If Defendant is of the opinion that this case cannot be

resolved by summary judgment, Defendant shall so inform the Court

prior to the date its summary judgment motion is due. All papers

filed with the Court shall be promptly served on Plaintiff.

Plaintiff's opposition to the dispositive motion shall be

filed with the Court and served on Defendant City and County of San

Francisco no later than sixty (60) days after the date on which

Defendant's motion is filed. The Ninth Circuit has held that the

following notice should be given to plaintiffs:

The defendants have made a motion for summary 

Case 4:08-cv-05748-CW Document 38 Filed 02/08/10 Page 1 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 by which they seek to have your case

dismissed. A motion for summary judgment under Rule

56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will, if

granted, end your case. Rule 56 tells you what you must do in order to

oppose a motion for summary judgment. Generally,

summary judgment must be granted when there is no

genuine issue of material fact--that is, if there

is no real dispute about any fact that would affect

the result of your case, the party who asked for

summary judgment is entitled to judgment as a matter

of law, which will end your case. When a party you

are suing makes a motion for summary judgment that

is properly supported by declarations (or other

sworn testimony), you cannot simply rely on what

your complaint says. Instead, you must set out

specific facts in declarations, depositions, answers

to interrogatories, or authenticated documents, as

provided in Rule 56(e), that contradict the facts

shown in the defendant's declarations and documents

and show that there is a genuine issue of material

fact for trial. If you do not submit your own

evidence in opposition, summary judgment, if

appropriate, may be entered against you. If summary

judgment is granted in favor of defendants, your

case will be dismissed and there will be no trial.

See Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 963 (9th Cir. 1998) (en banc).

Plaintiff is advised to read Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure and Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S. Ct.

2548, 91 L. Ed. 2d 265 (1986) (party opposing summary judgment must

come forward with evidence showing triable issues of material fact

on every essential element of his claim). Plaintiff is cautioned

that because he bears the burden of proving his allegations in this

case, he must be prepared to produce evidence in support of those

allegations when he files his opposition to Defendant’s dispositive

motion. Such evidence may include sworn declarations from himself

and other witnesses to the incident, and copies of documents

authenticated by sworn declaration. Plaintiff is advised that if

he fails to submit declarations contesting the version of the facts

Case 4:08-cv-05748-CW Document 38 Filed 02/08/10 Page 2 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 3

contained in Defendant’s declarations, Defendant’s version may be

taken as true and the case may be decided in Defendant’s favor

without a trial. Plaintiff will not be able to avoid summary

judgment simply by repeating the allegations of his complaint.

If Defendant wishes to file a reply brief, Defendant shall do

so no later than thirty (30) days after the date Plaintiff's

opposition is filed. 

The motion shall be deemed submitted as of the date the reply

brief is due. No hearing will be held on the motion unless the

Court so orders at a later date. 

All communications by Plaintiff with the Court must be served

on Defendant’s counsel by mailing a true copy of the document to

Defendant’s counsel.

It is Plaintiff's responsibility to prosecute this case. 

Plaintiff must keep the Court informed of any change of address and

must comply with the Court's orders in a timely fashion. Failure

to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to

prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

2/8/10

Dated 

CLAUDIA WILKEN

United States District Judge

Case 4:08-cv-05748-CW Document 38 Filed 02/08/10 Page 3 of 4
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KERRY A. HERBERT JR,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SF CITY & COUNTY et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV08-05748 CW 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court,

Northern District of California.

That on February 8, 2010, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said

envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located

in the Clerk's office.

Kerry Arthur Herbert

25125 Santa Clara Street, #165

Hayward, CA 94541

Dated: February 8, 2010

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Sheilah Cahill, Deputy Clerk

Case 4:08-cv-05748-CW Document 38 Filed 02/08/10 Page 4 of 4