Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Castro v. Sobkowiak

United States District Court, W.D. New York

May 8, 2015

JUAN CASTRO, 11-B-2930, Plaintiff,
v.
PAUL SOBKOWIAK, et al., Defendants.

DECISION AND ORDER

H. KENNETH SCHROEDER, Jr., Magistrate Judge.

This case was referred to the undersigned by the Hon. Richard J. Arcara, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1), for all pretrial matters and to hear and report upon dispositive motions. Dkt. #19.

Currently before the Court is defendant Jeffrey Brewer's motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Dkt. #37. In support of the motion, defendant avers that he is a member of University at Buffalo Surgeons, Inc., which has a contract to provide surgical services at Erie County Medical Center Corporation, but is not employed by the Erie County Medical Center Corporation, the State of New York, or the New York State Department of Corrections. Dkt. #37-2.

As a result of this submission, the Court deems it necessary to invoke the following provision set forth in Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(d):

If, on a motion under Rule 12(b)(6) or 12(c), matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion must be treated as one for summary judgment under Rule 56. All parties must be given a reasonable opportunity to present all the material made pertinent to the motion.

In accordance with Irby v. New York City Transit Authority, 262 F.3d 412 (2d Cir. 2001), attached is a notice of the requirements of Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the consequences of noncompliance with the rules. Plaintiff's response shall be filed no later than June 19, 2015. Replies, if any, shall be filed no later than July 10, 2015.

SO ORDERED.

IMPORTANT NOTICE TO PRO SE LITIGANTS

RULE 56 MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

This Notice is to advise you that a party in your lawsuit has filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which means that summary judgment will be granted if the Court finds that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c).

Failure to Respond to This Motion For Summary Judgment May Result in The Grant of Judgment in Favor of The Party Seeking Summary Judgment and The Dismissal of All or Part of The Case.

Opposing Affidavits and Exhibits

Therefore, if the motion seeks summary judgment against you, you MUST submit opposing papers in the form of one or more affidavits (or affirmations) made upon the personal knowledge of the person signing each affidavit. Each affidavit must set forth admissible facts and must show that the person submitting that affidavit is competent to testify as to the matters stated therein (because he or she has personal knowledge of the facts set forth in the affidavit). If you wish to submit exhibits in opposition to the motion, you may ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.