Wafer v. Suesberry et al

Filing 85

ORDER Striking Plaintiff's 83 Response to Defendant's Answer signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 05/29/2014. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 9 ANTHONY D. WAFER, 10 11 12 Plaintiff, v. W. SUESBERRY, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:07-cv-00865-AWI-BAM (PC) ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S ANSWER (ECF No. 83) Plaintiff Anthony D. Wafer (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in 16 forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds 17 against Defendants Suesberry and Reynolds for failure to provide medication in violation of the 18 Eighth Amendment. On April 22, 2014, Defendant Reynolds answered Plaintiff’s complaint. 19 On May 27, 2014, Plaintiff filed a response to Defendant Reynolds’ answer. (ECF No. 83.) 20 In relevant part, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that there shall be a 21 complaint, an answer to a complaint, and, if the court orders one, a reply to an answer. Fed. R. 22 Civ. P. 7(a). The Court has not ordered a reply to Defendant Reynolds’ answer and declines to 23 make such an order. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s response to the answer is HEREBY STRICKEN 24 from the record. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 Dated: /s/ Barbara May 29, 2014 27 A. McAuliffe _ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 28 1

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?