Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05227/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05227-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Carpenters Pension Trust Fund for Northern California
Defendant
Gary Giannini
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

C 14-05227 LB

ORDER

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Northern District of California

San Francisco Division

GARY GIANNINI,

Plaintiff,

v.

CARPENTERS PENSION TRUST FUND

FOR NORTHERN CALIFORNIA,

Defendant.

_____________________________________/

No. C 14-05227 LB

ORDER CONSTRUING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT AS AN OPPOSITION TO

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO

DISMISS

[Re: ECF No. 13]

Plaintiff Gary Giannini, who is proceeding pro se, sued Defendant Carpenters Pension Trust

Fund for Northern California in state court. Defendant removed the action to federal court and now

moves to dismiss the action, arguing that Plaintiff’s claims are preempted under the Employee

Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”). See Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 5. Defendant filed

its motion on December 2, 2014, and served Plaintiff with it by mail. Plaintiff’s opposition to the

motion was due on December 19, 2014. See N.D. Cal. Civ. L.R. 7-3(a). Plaintiff missed that

deadline, so the court extended the deadline to January 8, 2015. See 12/24/2014 Order, ECF No. 11. 

On that day, Plaintiff filed a document that is captioned as a motion for summary judgment, but

which states only and without elaboration that he was never informed that he was supposed to send a

copy of his social security award letter to Defendant within 90 days of receiving it and that he would

like to invoke the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. See Opposition, ECF No. 13. This does

not appear to be a motion for summary judgment but instead appears to be an opposition to

Case 3:14-cv-05227-LB Document 14 Filed 01/13/15 Page 1 of 2
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

C 14-05227 LB

ORDER 2

UNITED 

STATES 

DISTRICT 

COURT

For the Northern District of California

Defendant’s motion to dismiss. A motion for summary judgment also is not appropriate at this stage

of the litigation. Accordingly, the court construes Plaintiff’s filing as an opposition and terminates

the motion within the court’s Electronic Case Filing system. Pursuant to the court’s December 24,

2014 order, Defendant’s reply is still due on January 15, 2015, and the hearing on the motion is still

set for 9:30 a.m. on January 29, 2015 in Courtroom C, 15th Floor, United States District Court, 450

Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California 94102. See id. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 12, 2015 _______________________________

LAUREL BEELER

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:14-cv-05227-LB Document 14 Filed 01/13/15 Page 2 of 2