Pfile

(PC) Beinlick v. Pfile

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJanuary 5, 20222:17-cv-00824California5,923 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BRIAN BEINLICK, No. 2:17-CV-0824-WBS-DMC Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ADAM PACE, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, who is proceeding with retained counsel, brings this civil action. Pending before the court is Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, which is construed as a motion for summary adjudication, ECF No. 53, Plaintiff’s opposition thereto, ECF No. 56, Defendants’ reply, ECF No. 57, and supplemental briefs, ECF Nos. 59 and 60. Defendants argue Plaintiff’s claims are unexhausted as to four of the five defendants to this action – Smith, Lau, Smiley, and Pace. Defendants concede Plaintiff’s claims as against Defendant Pfile are exhausted. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide for summary judgment or summary adjudication when “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.