Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Watson v. Jamsen, 16-13770. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20171207b92 Visitors: 5
Filed: Dec. 06, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 06, 2017
Summary: ORDER R. STEVEN WHALEN , Magistrate Judge . Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Defer Summary Judgment [Doc. #30], in which he asks to defer ruling on Defendant McCarthy's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. #21] until he has had the opportunity for more discovery. I denied a similar motion [Doc. #10] in which he sought to defer a summary judgment motion filed by Defendant Landfair. Both summary judgment motions were based on Plaintiff's failure to exhaust his administrative remedies,
More

ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Defer Summary Judgment [Doc. #30], in which he asks to defer ruling on Defendant McCarthy's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. #21] until he has had the opportunity for more discovery.

I denied a similar motion [Doc. #10] in which he sought to defer a summary judgment motion filed by Defendant Landfair. Both summary judgment motions were based on Plaintiff's failure to exhaust his administrative remedies, as required by 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a), and neither of which required additional discovery. However, I did grant Plaintiff additional time to respond to Defendant McCarthy's motion. See Doc. #32. In addition, both Landfair and McCarthy have been dismissed without prejudice, based on the exhaustion issue.

Therefore, Plaintiff's present motion [Doc. #30] is DENIED AS MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer