Jones v. Kern High School District et al

Filing 57

MEMORANDUM, DECISION and ORDER denying defendants' motion to strike fourth amended complaint as moot 50 , 51 . Vacating oral argument set for 1/12/2009 and directing plaintiff to file fifth amended complaint signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 1/6/2009. (Timken, A)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 By Memorandum Decision and Order filed on August 14, 2008, Plaintiff was ordered to file a Fourth Amended Complaint. August 14, 2008 Order specifically ruled: The TAC is 79 pages long and comprised of 216 paragraphs, which include citations to various legal authority. Because Plaintiff must file a Fourth Amended Complaint, Plaintiff is ordered to delete all cases [sic] citations and allegations discussing cases from the Fourth Amended Complaint. These allegations essentially constitute legal argument and/or legal conclusions and have no place in a complaint. Further, they make reading and analyzing the pleading very 1 The KERN HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al., vs. Plaintiff, KRISTA JONES, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV-F-07-1628 OWW/TAG MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT AS MOOT (Docs. 50 & 51), VACATING ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR JANUARY 12, 2009, AND DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE FIFTH AMENDED COMPLAINT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

1 2

difficult and cannot be admitted or denied by the Defendants. The Fourth Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff on September

3 8, 2008 continues to include numerous citations to legal 4 authority. 5 Defendants move to strike these portions of the Fourth 6 Amended Complaint delineated n Defendants' Exhibit A to the 7 motion to strike because of Plaintiff's failure to comply with 8 the August 14, 2008 Order and direct Plaintiff to file a Fifth 9 Amended Complaint in compliance with the Court's Order. 10 In responding to Defendants' motion to strike, Plaintiff 11 does not oppose the motion. 12 Fourth Amended Complaint did not comply with the Court's Order 13 and asserts that the failure to do so was unintentional and 14 inadvertent. 15 proposed Fifth Amended Complaint which deletes the legal 16 authorities delineated in Defendants' motion to strike. 17 Defendants agree that the Fifth Amended Complaint be filed. 18 Defendants' motion to strike is DENIED as moot. 19 argument on the motion to strike set for January 12, 2009 is 20 VACATED. 21 Complaint within ten (10) days of the filing date of this 22 Memorandum Decision and Order. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 26 2 Dated: 668554 January 6, 2009 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Plaintiff is ordered to file the proposed Fifth Amended Oral Plaintiff attaches as an exhibit a copy of the Plaintiff acknowledges that the