Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03591/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-03591-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Cinema 7 Corporation
Defendant
James R. Mitchell
Defendant
Michael Alexander Smith
Plaintiff

Document Text:

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL ALEXANDER SMITH,

Plaintiff,

 v.

JAMES R. MITCHELL & CINEMA 7

CORPORATION,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 06-3591 SI

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO DISMISS AND

ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

On December 15, 2006, the Court heard oral argument on the motion to dismiss, or alternatively

for summary judgment, filed by defendants James L. Mitchell (sued herein as James R. Mitchell) and

Cinema 7, Inc. (sued herein as Cinema 7 Corporation). Having considered the papers submitted by the

parties and arguments at the hearing, the Court denies the motion without prejudice to renewal. (Docket

No. 11). As discussed at the hearing, defendants may renew their motion, augmented with additional

evidence if defendants so choose. Plaintiff is cautioned that any opposition to a motion for summary

judgment must be supported by evidence such as sworn declarations or affidavits. Plaintiff is directed

to review the attached information for guidance regarding preparing an opposition to a summary

judgment motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 19 , 2006 

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-03591-CRB Document 21 Filed 12/19/06 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

Plaintiff must bear in mind the following notice and warning regarding summary judgment

as he prepares his opposition to any summary judgment motion: The defendants may make a motion

for summary 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 defendants'

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, your case will be dismissed and there will be no trial.

(See Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 962-63 (9th Cir. 1998). 

Case 3:06-cv-03591-CRB Document 21 Filed 12/19/06 Page 2 of 2