Stephens v. Armstrong et al

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
CENTRAL DIVISION
BRIAN STEPHENS 	PLAINTIFF
ADC #150292
v. 	No: 4:25-cv-00881 JM-PSH
SHEILA ARMSTRONG, et al. 	DEFENDANTS
ORDER
On 	November 	7, 	2025, 	Sheila 	K. 	Armstrong 	and 	Aric 	Simmons
(“Defendants”) filed a Motion for Summary Judgment together with a Brief in
Support and Statement of Material Undisputed Facts (Doc. Nos. 10 - 12) seeking to
dismiss Brian Stephens’ claims against them based on his alleged failure to exhaust
available administrative remedies. 	Stephens now has an opportunity to file a
response opposing the motion. To be considered, the response must be filed within
twenty-eight days of this order’s entry date.
At the summary judgment stage, a plaintiff cannot rest upon mere allegations
and, instead, must meet proof with proof. 	See Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e). Accordingly,
Stephens’ response must include legal arguments as well as evidence establishing
that there is a genuine issue of material fact that must be resolved at a hearing or
trial. Such evidence may include declarations or notarized affidavits that he or others
have signed. Affidavits and declarations are sworn statements that are made under
Case 4:25-cv-00881-JM-PSH Document 13 Filed 11/10/25 Page 1 of 3

penalty of perjury (see 	28 U.S.C. § 1746). Unsworn statements will not be
considered in deciding the motion for summary judgment. And to be considered, an
affidavit or declaration must be based on personal knowledge of the person who
signs it.
If Stephens files a response, he must also file a separate, short statement which
lists: (a) any disagreement he has with the specifically numbered factual assertions
contained in the defendants’ statement of undisputed facts; and (b) any other
disputed facts that he believes must be resolved at a hearing or trial. See Local Rule
56.1, Rules of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
If Stephens disputes any of the facts set forth in the Defendants’ statement of
undisputed facts, he must identify each numbered paragraph that contains the facts
he disputes and, for each paragraph, explain why he disputes those facts.
Finally, Stephens is advised that if he intends to rely upon grievances or
records that have been filed with the Court previously, he must specifically refer to
those documents by docket number, page, date, and heading. The Court will not sift
through the file to find support for Stephens’ factual contentions. 	See Crossley v.
Georgia-Pacific, Corp., 355 F.3d 1112, 1113-14 (8th Cir. 2004) (affirming the grant
of summary judgment because a plaintiff failed to properly refer to specific pages of
the record that supported his position).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
Case 4:25-cv-00881-JM-PSH Document 13 Filed 11/10/25 Page 2 of 3

Stephens may file a response to the Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment along with a separate statement of disputed facts that complies with Fed.
R. Civ. P. 56, Local Rule 56.1, and the instructions set forth in this Order within
twenty-eight days. 	While Stephens is not required to file a response to the motion
for summary judgment, if he does not respond, the facts set forth in the Defendants’
statement of facts may be deemed admitted by Stephens, pursuant to Local Rule
56.1(c).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of November, 2025.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 4:25-cv-00881-JM-PSH Document 13 Filed 11/10/25 Page 3 of 3