NOT FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS
DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN
DONALD L. RIFENBERG,
Plaintiff,
v.
VARLACK VENTURES, INC.,
Defendant.
_____________________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil No. 2005-174
)
)
)
)
)
)
ATTORNEYS:
Andrew L. Capdeville, Esq.
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. 
For the plaintiff.
Andrew C. Simpson, Esq.
St. Thomas, U.S.V.I. 
For the defendant.
ORDER
GÓMEZ, C.J.
Before the Court is the motion of the plaintiff Donald L.
Rifenberg (“Rifenberg”) for partial summary judgment on his
negligence action against Varlack Ventures, Incorporated
(“Varlack”). 
Summary judgment shall be granted only if “the pleadings,
depositions, answer to interrogatories, and admissions on file,
Case: 3:05-cv-00174-CVG   Document #: 94   Filed: 09/18/08   Page 1 of 3
Rifenberg v. Varlack Ventures, Inc.
Civil No. 2005-174
Order
Page 2
together with affidavits, if any, show 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). 
A fact is material if its existence or nonexistence might affect
the outcome of the suit under applicable law. Anderson v. Liberty
Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202
(1986).  
The moving party has the initial burden of informing the
Court of the basis for a motion for summary judgment and pointing
out those parts of the record which he or she believes
demonstrate an absence of any genuine issue of material fact. 
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91
L.Ed.2d 265 (1986).  If the moving party carries its burden, the
non-moving party “may not rest upon the mere allegations or
denials of his or her pleadings, but his or her response must set
forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for
trial.”  Conners v. Fawn Mining Corp., 30 F.3d 483, 489 (3d Cir.
1994) (citations omitted).  All reasonable inferences are drawn
in favor of the non-movant.  Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255. 
The Court finds that Rifenberg has failed to meet his burden
of demonstrating the absence of any genuine issue of material
fact.  Accordingly, it is hereby
Case: 3:05-cv-00174-CVG   Document #: 94   Filed: 09/18/08   Page 2 of 3
Rifenberg v. Varlack Ventures, Inc.
Civil No. 2005-174
Order
Page 3
ORDERED that Rifenberg’s motion for summary judgment is
DENIED; and it is further
ORDERED that Rifenberg’s motion to continue the September
19, 2008, hearing on the motion for summary judgment is DENIED as
moot.
 
      S\______________________
           Curtis V. Gómez
            Chief Judge  
Case: 3:05-cv-00174-CVG   Document #: 94   Filed: 09/18/08   Page 3 of 3