ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO TAKE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OFF CALENDAR Re: Dkt. No. 22

MAXINE M. CHESNEY, District Judge.

Before the Court is defendant's "Civil L.R. 7-11 Motion to Take Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment Off Calendar," filed June 27, 2018. Plaintiff has filed opposition, to which defendant has replied.1

By the instant motion, defendant seeks an order taking off calendar plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, presently noticed for hearing August 10, 2018, for the asserted reason that "[d]efendant will be significantly prejudiced if it has to prepare a comprehensive opposition . . . without the benefit of any discovery." (See Def.'s Opp. at 3:17-19.)

Under Civil Local Rule 7-11, a party may seek an order "with respect to miscellaneous administrative matters, not otherwise governed by a federal statute, [f]ederal or local rule or standing order of the assigned judge." See Civil L.R. 7-11. As plaintiff points out, the matter addressed in defendant's motion is governed by a federal rule, specifically, Rule 56(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(d) (providing where "nonmovant shows by affidavit or declaration that, for specified reasons, it cannot present facts essential to justify its opposition [to a motion for summary judgment]," district court may "allow time . . . to take discovery"); see also Family Home & Finance Center, Inc. v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., 525 F.3d 822, 827 (9th Cir. 2008) (setting forth "requirements" nonmovant must satisfy to be entitled to "continuance on a motion for summary judgment").

Accordingly, plaintiff's motion pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-11 is hereby DENIED, without prejudice to plaintiff's seeking relief under Rule 56(d).

IT IS SO ORDERED.