Blomdahl 340267 v. Jaffe

1 WO SH — 2 — — 3 — — 4 — — 5 — 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA — 8 — 9 Adam Paul Blomdahl, No. CV 19-00227-PHX-MTL (DMF) 10 Plaintiff, 11 v. ORDER — 12 — Unknown Jaffe, et al., — 13 — Defendants. — 14 — 15 Plaintiff Adam Paul Blomdahl, who is currently confined in Arizona State Prison 16 Complex (ASPC)-Florence, Browning Unit in Florence, Arizona, brought this civil rights 17 action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . Plaintiff has filed the following motions: (1) Motion 18 for Summary Judgment (Doc. 45); (2) Motion for Defendants to Respond (Doc. 51); (3) 19 Motion to Submit Exhibits (Doc. 54); and (4) Motion to Submit Operational Journal (Doc. 20 55). Also before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Strike. (Doc. 50.) 21 I. Background 22 Upon screening Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), 23 the Court determined that Plaintiff stated a Fourteenth Amendment conditions-of24 confinement claim against Maricopa County Health Services Psychiatrist Dr. Jaffe in 25 Count Two and a Fourteenth Amendment excessive force claim against Maricopa County 26 Sheriff’s Office (MSCO) Sergeant Shamrock in Count Three. (Doc. 8.) The Court directed 27 Defendants Jaffe and Shamrock to answer and dismissed the remaining claims and 28 Defendants. (Id.) 1 II. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment 2 A court must grant summary judgment “if the movant shows that there is no genuine 3 dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” 4 Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a); see also Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986). The 5 movant bears the initial responsibility of presenting the basis for its motion and identifying 6 those portions of the record, together with affidavits, if any, that it believes demonstrate 7 the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Celotex, 477 U.S. at 323 . Additionally, 8 Local Rule of Civil Procedure 56.1(a) requires that: Any party filing a motion for summary judgment must file a — 9 — statement, separate from the motion and memorandum of law, 10 setting forth each material fact on which the party relies in support of the motion. The separate statement should include — 11 — only those facts that the Court needs to decide the motion. 12 Other undisputed facts (such as those providing background about the action or the parties) may be included in the — 13 — memorandum of law, but should not be included in the separate 14 statement of facts. Each material fact in the separate statement must be set forth in a separately numbered paragraph and must — 15 — refer to a specific admissible portion of the record where the 16 fact finds support (for example, affidavit, deposition, discovery response, etc.). A failure to submit a separate statement of 17 facts in this form may constitute grounds for the denial of 18 the motion. (Emphasis added.) — 19 — In his Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff fails to set forth or discuss the — 20 — relevant legal standards for obtaining summary judgment and does not comply with the — 21 — requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 or Local Rule of Civil Procedure 56.1 — 22 — for filing summary judgment motions. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a) (a party moving for — 23 — summary judgment must identify each claim or defense on which summary judgment is — 24 — sought and show there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact); LRCiv 56.1(a) — 25 — (requiring a separate statement of facts that refer to a specific admissible portion of the — 26 — record where the fact finds support). Plaintiff did not submit a separate statement of facts — 27 — consisting of separately numbered paragraphs citing to specific evidence in the record that — 28 — 1 support his claims as required by the local rules. Plaintiff has failed to meet his initial 2 burden at summary judgment of showing that there is no genuine dispute as to any material 3 fact. Accordingly, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment without 4 prejudice and without requiring a response from Defendants. See Nissan Fire & Marine 5 Ins. Co., Ltd. v. Fritz Co., Inc., 210 F.3d 1099, 1102-03 (9th Cir. 2000) (if the movant fails 6 to carry its initial burden of production, the nonmovant need not produce anything).1 7 III. Plaintiff’s Miscellaneous Motions 8 In his Motion for Defendants to Respond (Doc. 51), Plaintiff moves the Court to 9 require Defendants to respond to his Motion for Stipulation of Plaintiff’s Declaratory 10 Relief (Doc. 47). On April 6, 2020, the Court issued an Order striking the Motion for 11 Stipulation of Plaintiff’s Declaratory Relief from the record. (Doc. 49.) The Court will 12 not order Defendants to respond to a motion that has been stricken from the docket. 13 Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion for Defendants to Respond will be denied. 14 In his Motion to Submit Exhibits (Doc. 54) and Motion to Submit Operational 15 Journal (Doc. 55), Plaintiff asks the Court to allow him to submit several hundred pages of 16 exhibits, but the exhibits are not attached to a motion, response, reply, or any other 17 pleading. Plaintiff may submit exhibits to support his motions, responses, and replies in 18 this action, but he will not be permitted to file a random assortment of exhibits that do not 19 serve as evidence in support of a motion, response, or reply that is currently pending before 20 the Court. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Submit Exhibits and his Motion to Submit 21 Operational Journal are denied without prejudice to Plaintiff submitting some or all of these 22 exhibits as attachments to an appropriate motion, response, or reply. 23 IT IS ORDERED: 24 (1) The reference to the Magistrate Judge is withdrawn as to Plaintiff’s Motion 25 for Summary Judgment (Doc. 45), Motion for Defendants to Respond (Doc. 51), Motion — 26 — — 27 — 28 1 The Court will therefore deny Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment as moot. (See Doc. 50.) to Submit Exhibits (Doc. 54), Motion to Submit Operational Journal (Doc. 55), and 2| Defendants’ Motion to Strike (Doc. 50). 3 (2) ‘Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 45) is denied without 4| prejudice. 5 (3) | Defendants’ Motion to Strike (Doc. 50) is denied as moot. 6 (4) Plaintiff's Motion for Defendants to Respond (Doc. 51) is denied. 7 (5) Plaintiffs Motion to Submit Exhibits (Doc. 54) is denied. 8 (6) — Plaintiff’s Motion to Submit Operational Journal (Doc. 55) is denied. 9 (7) The deadline for filing dispositive motions is extended to sixty (60) days 10 | after the date this Order is issued. 11 Dated this 30th day of April, 2020. — 12 — Wichael T. Sihurde Michael T. Liburdi 15 United States District Judge — 16 — — 17 — — 18 — — 19 — — 20 — — 21 — — 22 — — 23 — — 24 — — 25 — — 26 — — 27 — — 28 —