Gallegos

Gallegos v. Seeley

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 20203:18-cv-01322California7,686 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ALEJANDRO GALLEGOS, Case No.: 3:18-cv-01322-JAH-MSB

CDCR #T-63165,

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT

Plaintiff, SEELEY’S MOTION FOR vs. SUMMARY JUDGMENT

PURSUANT TO

K. SEELEY, M..D.,

Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Defendant. 16 [ECF No. 32] 17 18 Currently before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 by Defendant K. Seeley (“Seeley”) (ECF No. 32). After he was notified of the requirements for opposing summary pursuant to Rand v. Rowland, 154 F.3d 952, 962-63 (9th Cir. 1998) (ECF No. 34), Plaintiff filed his Opposition (“Opp’n”) (ECF No. 736). Seeley has filed his Reply. (ECF No. 37.) While the Motion was initially calendared before Magistrate Judge Michael S. Berg, the Court has determined that this Motion is suitable for disposition upon the papers without oral argument and that no Report and Recommendation from Magistrate Judge Berg is necessary.…

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.