Hasan v. Johnson
Filing
83
ORDER STRIKING Plaintiff's Surreplys (Docs. 80 , 81 , 82 ) signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 10/19/2012. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JAWWAAD HASAN,
12
1:08-cv-00381-GSA-PC
Plaintiff,
13
14
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S
SURREPLIES
v.
C/O JOHNSON,
15
(Docs. 81, 82, 83.)
Defendant.
/
16
17
I.
BACKGROUND
18
Jawwaad Hasan (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with
19
this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff commenced this action on March 27,
20
2008. (Doc. 1.) This action now proceeds on the original Complaint filed on March 17, 2008,
21
against defendant Correctional Officer Johnson (“Defendant”), on Plaintiff’s claim for excessive
22
force in violation of the Eighth Amendment.1 (Doc. 19.)
23
On May 5, 2012, Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. (Docs. 52, 54.) On June
24
20, 2012, Plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion. (Doc. 57.) On July 5, 2012, Defendant a reply
25
to the opposition. (Doc. 60, 61.)
26
///
27
1
28
On August 20, 2010, the Court dismissed the Doe Defendants and Plaintiff’s supervisory liability claims
from this action, based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. (Doc. 19.) On February 13, 2012, the Court dismissed
Plaintiff’s state law claims via Defendants’ motion to dismiss. (Doc. 43.)
1
1
On August 10, 2012, Plaintiff filed a supplemental opposition to the motion for summary
2
judgment. (Docs. 70, 71, 72.) On October 1, 2012, Defendant filed a response to the supplemental
3
opposition. (Docs. 77, 78.)
4
On October 11, 2012, Plaintiff filed three documents: (1) Sur-Reply Objections to
5
Defendant’s Medical Evidence, (2) Declaration of Plaintiff in Support of Objection to Medical
6
Evidence, and (3) Sur-Reply to Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiff’s Supplemental Objections to
7
Defendant’s Evidence. (Docs. 80, 81, 82.)
8
II.
SURREPLY
9
The Local Rules provide for a motion, an opposition, and a reply. Neither the Local Rules
10
nor the Federal Rules provide the right to file a surreply, and the Court neither requested one nor
11
granted a request on the behalf of Plaintiff to file one. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s surreplies, filed on
12
October 11, 2012, shall be stricken from the record.
13
III.
CONCLUSION
14
Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
15
1.
16
17
record;
2.
18
19
Plaintiff’s surreplies, filed on October 11, 2012, are STRICKEN from the Court’s
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment, filed on May 5, 2012, is deemed
submitted under Local Rule 230(l); and
3.
20
No further submissions by either party in support of or opposition to Defendant’s
motion for summary judgment shall be permitted.
21
22
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
6i0kij
October 19, 2012
/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?