Harold C. Banks v. City of Palo Alto, City of Palo Alto Police Department, Ed Austin, Sgt., Pam Roskowski, Lt., Chris Durkin, Assistant Chief

943 F.2d 55 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Harold C. BANKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF PALO ALTO, City of Palo Alto Police Department, Ed Austin, Sgt., Pam Roskowski, Lt., Chris Durkin, Assistant Chief, et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 89-15545. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 10, 1991. * Decided Sept. 13, 1991. 1 Before CANBY and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges, and NIELSEN, District Judge. ** 2 MEMORANDUM *** 3 Under the standard articulated in Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 US 242 (1986), and Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 US 317 (1986), Judge Williams properly granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants. Judge Ingram's prior ruling was interlocutory and subject to reconsideration at any time. FRCP 54(b). After that ruling, the Supreme Court delivered the Anderson and Celotex decisions and the parties completed discovery. Judge Williams gave appellant adequate guidance as to how to oppose defendants' motions…