A ft erexami ni ng t he br i efs and appe l l at e r ecor d, t hi s panel has det erm i ned * unani m ous l yt hator al ar gum entw oul d notm at er i al l yas s i s tt he det erm i nat i on of th is a p p e a l. See F e d . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a )(2 ); 1 0 th C ir. R . 3 4 .1 (G ). T h e c a se is th e re fo re o rd e re d su b m itt e d w ith o u t o ra l ar g u m e n t. 

## F I LED United States C ourt of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### S e p t e m b e r8,2006 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt PU BL I SH UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS

T E N T H C IR C U IT RO BERT L. M AR QU EZ,

P lain tiff-A p p e llan t, v. C A B L E O N E , IN C .,

D efe ndant - A ppel l ee. N o. 05- 2257

AP P EA L F ROM THE UNI TE D S TA TE S DI S TR I CT COURT

F OR THE DI S TR I CT OF NE W M EX I CO ( D. C. No . CI V- 0 4 - 1 2 3 8 J P/ACT) S ub m i t t ed o n the bri efs: * D enni s W . M ont oy a, M ont oy a Law , I nc. , R i o R ancho, N ew M exi co, forPl ai nt i ffA p p e llan t. J ohn D . G i ans el l o, O r r i ck, H err i ngt on & Sut cl i ffe L L P, N ew Y or k, N ew Y or k, for D efe ndant - A ppel l ee. B efor e T AC HA , C h ie f J u d g e , O’ BRI EN , and M c CO NNELL , C i rcui tJudg es. M c CO NNELL , C i r cui tJ udge.-2-

Pl ai nt i ff Rober tM ar quez appeal s fr om the di s tr i ctcourt ’ s or dergr ant i ng su m m a ryju d g m e n t to h is fo rm e r e m p lo y e r, C a b le O n e , In c ., o n h is c laim th a t it r et al i at ed aga i ns thi m forengagi ng i n pr ot ect ed ac t i vi tyunderT i t l e V I I of the Ci v i l Ri g h t s Ac t , 4 2 U. S . C. § § 2 0 0 0 e t o 2 0 0 0 e - 1 7 . W e a ffi r m. Pl ai nt i ff’ s compl ai ntal l eged that , i n r et al i at i on foran empl oym ent d isc rim in a tio n law su it h e filed a g a in st C a b le O n e in 2 0 0 0 , C a b le O n e fa lse ly acc us ed hi m of embezzl ementof companypr operty . Pl ai nt i ff f i l ed hi s or i gi nal e m p lo ym e n t d isc rim in a tio n law su it i n M a y2 0 0 0 a n d th e su it w a s s e ttl e d in S e p tem b e r 2 0 0 0 . H e w a s in d icte d fo r e m b e z z lem e n t o f C a b le O n e p ro p e rtyin J u n e 2 0 0 3 , b u t th e c ri m in a l c h a rg e s w e re d is m is s e d in 2 0 0 4 . B efor e fi l i ng an ans w er , C abl e O ne r es ponded t o the compl ai ntbyfi l i ng a m ot i on ent i t l ed: “N ot i ce of M ot i on and M ot i on t o D i s m i s s the C om pl ai ntfor Fai l ur e t o St at e a Cl ai m orforSum m aryJ udgm ent , ” A pl t . A pp. at8, w i th an acc om pany i ng m emora ndum and evi dent i arym at er i al s . I n thi s m ot i on, C abl e O ne p re se n ted th e fo llo w in g e v id e n c e . S e v e ra l m o n th s b e fo re p lain tiff filed h is or i gi nal di s cr i m i nat i on l aw s ui t , C abl e O ne bec ame aw ar e thata s i gni fi cant n u m b e r o f

h o u s e h o ld s in a N e w M e x ic o to w n w e re re c e iv in g f re e c a b le . It lau n c h e d a n in v e stig a tio n a n d u lti m a telyc o n c lu d e d so m e o f its in sta llers in t hi s t ow n w er e i ns t al l i ng fr ee c abl e forthei rper s onal pr ofi t . Pl ai nt i ff w as nott he focus of the i nves t i gat i on, buta w i tnes s and otherevi dence i m pl i cat ed hi m i n t he-3-

s c h e m e . C a b le O n e c o n ta c te d th e F B I i n J u n e 2 0 0 0 , w h ic h to o k n o a c tio n . A y earl at er , t he N ew M exi co s t at e pol i ce be gan an i nves t i gat i on, noti ni t i at ed by C a b le O n e , w h ic h le d to p la in tiff ’s 2 0 0 3 in d ic tm e n t. P lain tiff filed a n o bjec tio n to C a b le O n e ’s m o tio n , arg u in g th a t itw a s n o t a val i d m ot i on t o di s m i s s underFed. R . C i v. P. 12( b) ( 6) beca us e i tr efe r ence d m a ter ials o u tsid e o f

th e c o m p lain t. P lain tiff a c k n o w led g e d th a t th e m o tio n sh o u ld pr oper l ybe conve r t ed t o a mot i on fors um m aryj udgm ent , butar gued thats uch a m ot i on coul d notbe fi l ed pr i ort o the fi l i ng of an a ns w er . H e furtherar gued that th e su m m a ryju d g m e n t m o tio n sh o u ld b e d e n ied b e c a u se h e h a d n o t h a d a re a listic o p p o rtu n ityto d isc o v e r in fo rm a tio n e ss e n tial to o p p o sin g th e m o tio n . H e d id n o t, how ever , fi l e an a ffi davi tunderFeder al R ul e of Ci vi l Pr ocedur e 56( f) , w hi ch al l ow s a part yt o obt ai n a deferr al of a s um m aryj udgm entrul i ng pendi ng fur ther di s coveryi f the affi davi ti dent i fi es the pr obabl e fa ct s notavai l abl e, the s t eps tak e n to o b tain th e se fa c ts, a n d h o w a d d iti o n a l ti m e w ill e n a b le th e p lain tiff to re b u t th e d e fe n d a n t’ s a lle g a tio n s . See Com m . f orthe Fi rs tA m endm entv. C a mp b e ll , 962 F. 2d 1517, 1522- 23 ( 10th C i r . 1992) ( des cr i bi ng r equi r ement s of R u le 56 (f) affid av it ). T he di s t r i ctcour trul ed thatpl ai nt i ff ha d expl i ci tnot i ce f r om the t i t l e and cont entof C abl e O ne’ s m ot i on t hati tcoul d be conve r t ed i nt o a mot i on for s um m aryj udgm ent . B eca us e pl ai nt i ff ha d fai l ed t o fi l e a Rul e 56( f) aff i davi t , t he cour tr ej ect ed hi s ar gum entt hathe had nothad an opportuni tyt o conduct-4-

dis cov ery . Itrul ed thatsum m aryj ud gm ent w as ot herw i se approp ri at e, becau se C abl e O ne had pr es ent ed a faci al l yl egi t i m at e r at i onal e fori t s i nves t i gat i on and pol i ce r eport , and pl ai nt i ff ha d notpr es ent ed anyevi dence thatthi s expl anat i on w a s p re te x t. See Argo v . B l ue C r os s & Bl ue Shi eld of Kan. , Inc. , 452 F. 3d 1193, 1202 ( 10t h C i r . 2006) ( des cr i bi ng bur den- s hi ft i ng anal y s i s of r et al i at i on cl ai m at s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t s ta g e ). O n appea l , pl ai nt i ff c ont ends thatthe di s tr i ctcourterr ed i n gr ant i ng s um m aryj udgm entbeca us e the rul es of ci vi l pr ocedur e do notperm i ts uch a m o tio n b e fo re a n a n sw e r h a s b e e n filed , an d if th e yd o , h e d id n o t h a v e a d e q u a te not i ce be for e the conve r s i on. “W e r evi ew foran abus e of di s cr et i on a di s tr i ct cour t ’ s deci s i on t o cons i derevi dence bey ond the pl eadi ngs and conve r ta mot i on t o di s m i s s t o a mot i on fors um m aryj udgm ent . ” B r yce v. E pis copalC hur ch i n the D i oces e of

C ol o. , 2 8 9 F .3 d 6 4 8 , 6 5 4 (1 0 th C ir. 2 0 0 2 ). W e fin d n o m e rit to p lai n ti ff ’s claim s o f e rror. R ul e 56 expr es s l ys t at es t hata mot i on fors um m aryj udgm entcan be fi l ed bya defendi ng par t y“atanyt i m e. ” Fed. R . C i v. P. 56( b) . “C our t s and comm ent at or s have a cknow l edged thatno ans w erneed be fi l ed befor e a defe ndant ’ s m ot i on fors um m aryj udgm entm aybe ent er t ai ned. ” I N V ST F i n. G r oup, Inc. v. C hem - Nucl earSys . , Inc. , 8 1 5 F . 2 d 3 9 1 , 4 0 4 (6th C ir . 1 9 8 7 ); s ee als o R ohnerv. Uni on P ac. R . R . C o. , 225 F. 2d 272, 274 ( 10th C i r . 1955) (reco g n izi n g v ali d ityo f m o ti o n fo r sum m aryjud g m en t fi led in li eu o f a n an sw er);-5-

1 0 A C h a rl e s A la n W ri g h t, A rt h u r R . M ille r, M a ry K a yK a n e , Feder alP r act i ce & P rocedu re § 2718 at301 ( 3d ed. 1998) ( “A defe ndi ng partyi s notr equi r ed byt he rule to fil e a n an sw er b efo re m o v ing fo r sum m aryjud g m en t. ”). Pl ai nt i ff makes a r el at ed ar gum entthata mot i on fors um m aryj udgm ent do es not t oll t he ti m e for fi l i ng an an sw er. C able O ne fil ed it s m oti on as a R u le 1 2 (b )(6 ) d ism iss a l m o tio n , h o w e v e r, w h ich c lea rlyd o e s to ll th e tim e to a n s w e r. See Fed. R . C i v. P. 12( a) ( 4) and 12( b) . T hus , the mot i on di d t ol l the ti m e to fil e a n an sw er u n ti l th e d istri ct co u rtco n v erted itto a m o ti o n fo r sum m ary ju d g m e n t a n d re s o lv e d th e m o tio n . C f . Wr ight, Mi l l er& Kane § 2718 at303- 04 ( i ndi cat i ng t hatt he t ol l i ng pr ovi s i on i n R ul e 12( a) s houl d, byanal ogy , appl yt o a su m m a ryju d g m e n t m o tio n filed p rio r to a n a n sw e r); F i rs tNat ’ lB ank of A r iz . v. C i t i es Ser v. C o. , 3 9 1 U . S . 2 5 3 (19 6 8 ) (affirm ing su m m aryjud g m en t w h ere d e fe n d a n t h a d n e v e r file d a n a n s w e r i n s ix y e a rs o f litig a tio n ). Pl ai nt i ff ne xtcont ends t hathe di d nothave a dequat e not i ce thatthe mot i on w oul d be conve r t ed i nt o a mot i on fors um m aryj udgm ent . “[Rul e] 12( b) s t at es t hat , w her e a Rul e 12( b) ( 6) m ot i on r ai s es m at t er s out s i de the pl eadi ngs , i ts hal l be t r eat ed as a mot i on fors um m aryj udgm ents ubj ectt o the r equi r ement s of [Rul e] 56. R ul e 56( c) i n tur n r equi r es t hatthe oppos i ng partybe gi ven t en day s not i ce pr i ort o hear i ng of the mot i on w i thi n w hi ch t o fi l e oppos i ng aff i davi t s . ” B ldg . & C ons tr . D ep’ tv. R ockwel lInt ’ lC or p. , 7 F .3 d 1 4 8 7 , 1 4 9 5 -9 6 (1 0 th C ir . 1 9 9 3 ). H er e, t he t i t l e of Cabl e O ne’ s m ot i on s t at ed i tw as a “[ n] ot i ce of [m ] ot i on, ” and-6-

itstat ed that w as a m o ti o n to d ism iss or, alt ern ati v ely , a m o ti o n fo r sum m ary ju d g m e n t, a n d it in c lu d e d e v id e n tia ry m a te ri a ls o u ts id e o f th e c o m p la in t. A p lt . A p p . at 8-2 3 0 . T h u s, p lai n ti ff h ad ex p li citn o ti ce that the d istri ct co u rt w o u ld c o n v e rt it to a m o tio n fo r s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. See 11 J ames W m . M oor e, Moor e’s Feder alP r act i ce ¶ 56. 30[4] atp. 56- 230 ( 3d ed. 2006) ( “[c ] our t s have c o n c lu d e d th a t a c o u rt is n o t re q u ire d to g iv e n o tice o f its in ten tio n to c o n v e rt a R ul e 12( b) ( 6) m ot i on i nt o a s um m aryj udgm entm ot i on w hen the mot i on w as sty led in th e a ltern a tiv e .”). M o re o v e r, p lain tiff ’s r e sp o n se to th e m o tio n c lea rly demonstr at ed thathe w as aw ar e thatthe mot i on w oul d be conve r t ed t o a R ul e 56 m o tio n fo r s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. S e e R o c kw e ll , 7 F. 3d at1496 ( hol di ng that p lain tiff h a d a d e q u a te n o tice o f c o n v e rsio n w h e re h is re sp o n se to th e m o tio n to di s m i s s demonstr at ed he w as aw ar e the courtcoul d converti tt o a mot i on for s um m aryj udgm ent ) . T hus , t he di s tr i ctcourtcorr ect l yrul ed thatpl ai nt i ff ha d a d e q u a te n o tic e o f

th e c o n v e rs io n . “[T] her e i s no r equi r ementi n R ul e 56 . . . thats um m aryj udgm entnotbe ent er ed unt i l di s coveryi s compl et e. ” P ub. Ser v. C o. of C ol o. v. C ont ’ lC as . C o. , 26 F. 3d 1508, 1518 ( 10t h C i r . 1994) ( quot at i on om i t t ed) . Pl ai nt i ff di d notfi l e a R u le 5 6 (f) a ffid a v it d e m o n stra tin g w h yh e c o u ld n o t y e t p re se n t ev id e n c e in oppos i t i on t o t he mot i on, nordi d he r eques ta cont i nuance pendi ng compl et i on of di s covery , nordi d he eve n i nform the di s tr i ctcourti n hi s pl eadi ngs how d isc o v e ryw o u ld h e lp h im o p p o se C a b le O n e ’s m o tio n . W e h a v e h e ld th a t,-7-

“[w ] her e a pa r t yoppos i ng s um m aryj udgm entand s eeki ng a cont i nuance pendi ng compl et i on of di s coveryfai l s t o t ake a dvant age of the s hel t erpr ovi ded by R ul e 56( f) byfi l i ng an affi davi t , ther e i s no abus e of di s cr et i on i n gr ant i ng s um m aryj udgm enti f i ti s ot herw i s e appr opr i at e. ” P as t er nak v. LearP etr ol eum Expl or at i on, Inc. , 790 F. 2d 828, 832- 33 ( 10th C i r . 1986) . Pl ai nt i ff doe s not c o n te n d th a t s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t w a s o th e rw is e in a p p ro p ri a te o n th e m e ri ts . H is re m a in in g a rg u m e n ts a re a ll b a se d o n h is in c o rre c t p re m ise th a t itw a s e rro r to d is m is s h is c o m p la in t fo r fa ilu re to s ta te a c la im fo r r e lie f u n d e r R u le 1 2 (b )( 6 ). A s t hi s cl ear l yw as nott he bas i s of the di s tr i ctcour t ’ s gr antof s um m aryj udgm ent u n d e r R u le 5 6 , th e s e a rg u m e n ts a re n o t r e le v a n t. T h e j u d g me n to f

t h e d i s t r i c tc o u r ti s AF F I RMED .