`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`No. CV 20-7872-GW-PVCx
`STANDING ORDER RE SUMMARY
`JUDGMENT MOTIONS
`
`))))))))))))
`
`Nantworks, LLC, et al.,
`Plaintiff(s),
`
`v.
`Bank of America Corporation, et al.,
`Defendant(s).
`
`You are instructed to read and to follow the requirements in Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and
`1.
`Central District of California Local Rules 56-1 through 56-3.
`2. A moving party who files a reply/response to an opposition to a motion for summary
`judgment (where the opposing party has filed a “Statement of Genuine Disputes”) shall file a
`“Response to Statement of Genuine Disputes” using the format delineated below. Said Response
`will include each initially designated uncontroverted fact (and supporting evidence), and, if the
`opposing party has raised a dispute to the moving party’s fact, the moving party’s response (and
`any supporting evidence) to rebut the opposing party’s contentions. For example:
`
`Moving Party’s Uncontroverted Facts and
`Supporting Evidence
`
`Opposing Party’s Response to Cited Fact
`and Supporting Evidence
`
`1. The accident occurred on June 1, 2013,
`at 1:30 p.m.
`Evidence: Deposition of Defendant at page
`5; Declaration of Witness A at ¶ 3.
`
`1. Undisputed
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`
`Case 2:20-cv-07872-GW-PVC Document 363 Filed 05/06/24 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:40512
`
`2. The signal light was green in Defendant’s
`direction when she entered into the
`intersection and immediately before
`Plaintiff’s vehicle “ran” the red light and
`struck Defendant’s truck.
`Evidence: 6/3/13 Deposition of Defendant at
`page 6.
`
`2. Disputed.
`Immediately before the accident, the
`light was green in Plaintiff’s direction and
`Defendant ran the red light.
`Evidence: 6/8/13 Deposition of Plaintiff at
`page 10.
`
`2. Moving Party’s Response
`On Page 10 of his deposition, Plaintiff merely states that he “believes” the light was
`green when he drove into the intersection. Also, on page 12, he admits that he had
`consumed ten bottles of beer within one hour before the accident. Further, in the police
`report prepared at the scene by Officer Green within one half hour of the accident, Plaintiff
`admitted that he couldn’t recall if the light was green when he entered into the intersection.
`See page 3 of Police Report No. A473501, attached as exhibit 101 to Defendant’s 6/3/13
`Deposition.
`
`3. Any evidentiary objections to materials filed in connection with summary judgment
`motions (for which a party desires the Court to specifically make a ruling) shall be delineated in
`a separate document (or documents) entitled "Request for Evidentiary Ruling on Specified
`Objections." Each objection shall: (1) cite to the evidentiary item and state its precise location by
`document name and Docket Number plus the page and line(s) where it appears, and (2) concisely
`articulate the bases for the objection(s). Objections will only be raised as to evidence (not to
`factual statements or factual characterizations in the opposing party's brief(s)). The Court will
`disregard any evidentiary objection(s) that do not comply with this instruction.
`
`IT IS SO ORDERED.
`
`DATED: May 6, 2024
`
`
`GEORGE H. WU
`United States District Judge
`
`2
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
