Mary Attalla v. Equinox Holdings, Inc. et al

Filing 14

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER Striking Plaintiff's Motion for Remand (Doc. 11) for Failure to Comply with Local Rule 7-3 11 by Judge Josephine L. Staton: Before the Court is Plaintiff Mary Attalla's Motion for Remand. (Mot., Doc.11.) Defen dant Equinox Holdings Inc filed an Opposition, and Plaintiff did not reply. (Opp'n, Doc. 12.) The Court finds this matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.Civ.P.78; C.D.Cal.R. 7-15. For the following reasons, the Court VACATES the hearing set for June 5, 2015, at 2:30 p.m. and STRIKES Plaintiff's Motion. See document for further details. (lwag)

____________________________________________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. SACV 15-00497-JLS (DFMx)
Title: Mary Attalla v. Equinox Holdings, Inc., et al.

Date: May 29, 2015

Present: Honorable JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Terry Guerrero
Deputy Clerk
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF:

Not Present

N/A
Court Reporter
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:

Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR REMAND (Doc. 11) FOR FAILURE TO
COMPLY WITH LOCAL RULE 7-3
Before the Court is Plaintiff Mary Attalla’s Motion for Remand. (Mot., Doc. 11.)
Defendant Equinox Holdings, Inc. filed an Opposition, and Plaintiff did not reply.
(Opp’n, Doc. 12.) The Court finds this matter appropriate for decision without oral
argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; C.D. Cal. R. 7-15. For the following reasons, the Court
VACATES the hearing set for June 5, 2015, at 2:30 p.m., and STRIKES Plaintiff’s
Motion.
After reviewing the papers, the Court finds that the Motion fails to comply with
Local Rule 7-3, which states that “counsel contemplating the filing of any motion shall
first contact opposing counsel to discuss thoroughly, preferably in person, the substance
of the contemplated motion and any potential resolution.” C.D. Cal. R. 7-3. This Rule
also requires counsel to include in all motions a statement indicating the date on which
this conference took place. Id. Plaintiff, however, has failed to provide the Court with a
statement or other evidence indicating that Plaintiff’s counsel attempted to meet and
confer prior to filing the Motion. (Mot.; see also Opp’n at 2 (“Plaintiff’s counsel did not
meet and confer with counsel for Equinox prior to filing Plaintiff’s Motion.”).)
Accordingly, the Motion fails to comply with Local Rule 7-3.
The purpose of Local Rule 7-3 is to eliminate, or narrow the scope of, the motion
and avoid unnecessary expense of the Court’s time and resources. A district court has the
discretion to strike a motion that fails to comply with the local rules. See Christian v.
Mattel, Inc., 286 F.3d 1118, 1129 (9th Cir. 2002) (“The district court has considerable
______________________________________________________________________________
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
1

____________________________________________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. SACV 15-00497-JLS (DFMx)
Title: Mary Attalla v. Equinox Holdings, Inc., et al.

Date: May 29, 2015

latitude in managing the parties’ motion practice and enforcing local rules that place
parameters on briefing.”).
Accordingly, because the Court finds that counsel failed to comply with Local
Rule 7-3, Plaintiff’s Motion is STRICKEN.
Initials of Preparer: tg

______________________________________________________________________________
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
2