Bean et al v. Pearson Education Incorporated

Filing 150

ORDER denying Defendant's 142 Motion for Leave to File Surreply. Signed by Senior Judge Paul G Rosenblatt on 7/18/12.(REW)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Tom Bean, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

10
11

v.

12

Pearson Education, Inc.,

13

Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CV 11-8030-PCT-PGR
ORDER

14
15

Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Surreply in Further

16

Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel. (Doc. 142.) Defendant asserts that Plaintiffs’

17

reply contains new arguments and inaccurate information. (Id.) Plaintiffs’ oppose the motion,

18

arguing that the proposed surreply repeats Defendant’s previous arguments and discusses

19

documents produced since Plaintiffs filed their motion to compel. (Doc. 144 at 2.)

20

The local rules make no provision for the filing of surreplies, see LRCiv 7.2, and the

21

Court finds that the discovery issues pending before it have been adequately briefed. The

22

Court notes that it will not consider any issues or evidence identified for the first time in

23

Plaintiffs’ reply brief.

24

Accordingly,

25

IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Surreply (Doc. 142).

26

DATED this 18th day of July, 2012.

27
28