Court Opinion

ID: 9396730
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-23 17:00:49.977484+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:19.122999
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       MAY 23 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

TYRELL CURTIS ERLEBACH,                         No. 22-35213

                Plaintiff-Appellant,            D.C. No. 1:18-cv-00173-MDH

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
RAJ ENTERPRISES OF CENTRAL
FLORIDA, DBA Pinnacle Laboratories,
DBA Pinnacle Laboratory Services, DBA
Pinnacle Labs; JOSEPH JOHNSON; MILLS
BRINSON III,

                Defendants-Appellees.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                            for the District of Idaho
                  M. Douglas Harpool, District Judge, Presiding

                             Submitted May 16, 2023**

Before:      BENNETT, MILLER, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.

      Tyrell Curtis Erlebach appeals from the district court’s judgment in favor of

defendants RAJ Enterprises of Central Florida, Joseph Johnson, and Mills Brinson

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
III in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various claims. We have jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051,

1056 (9th Cir. 2004). We vacate and remand.

      After the district court granted summary judgment for moving defendants in

early 2022, the district court entered judgment in favor of all defendants in the

action and closed the case. However, the district court had not granted summary

judgment for non-moving defendants RAJ Enterprises of Central Florida, LLC,

Joseph Johnson, and Mills Brinson, III, and thus, judgment in favor of those

defendants was premature. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a) (explaining that summary

judgment is proper if the “movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any

material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law”).

Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s judgment as to these three defendants

and remand for further proceedings.

      The parties will bear their own costs on appeal.

      VACATED and REMANDED.

                                          2                                    22-35213