Baker v. Gipson et al

Filing 36

ORDER STRIKING 30 Plaintiff's Motion in Opposition to Defendant's Answer signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 5/11/2015. (Jessen, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 ROBERT G. BAKER, Plaintiff, 13 14 v. 15 CONNIE GIPSON, et al., 16 Case No. 1: 13-cv-01931-MJS (PC) ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S ANSWER Defendants. (ECF No. 30) 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF Nos. 1 & 7.) The action proceeds against Defendant Kitt on Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical indifference claim. (ECF No. 11.) On February 19, 2015, Defendant filed an answer. (ECF No. 25.) Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion in opposition to Defendant’s answer. (ECF No. 30.) Defendant filed an opposition (ECF No. 34.), and Plaintiff has replied (ECF No. 35.). The matter is deemed submitted. Local Rule 230(l). Plaintiff’s motion is essentially a reply to Defendant’s answer. Plaintiff indicates whether he agrees or disagrees with each paragraph of Defendant’s answer and requests that the Court grant the relief he seeks in his First Amended Complaint 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 (“FAC”). Defendant responds that Plaintiff has not stated the particular legal grounds for his motion or specified what relief he is entitled to aside from the relief he seeks in his FAC in violation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(1). A party may file a reply to an answer if the Court orders one. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a)(7). The Court did not order Plaintiff to file a reply and none is necessary here. If Plaintiff is seeking to strike any portion of Defendant’s answer or affirmative defenses, he should state with particularity what portion or defenses he is seeking to have stricken and the basis for doing so. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(1)(B); See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) (“an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter” may be stricken from a pleading). Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion in opposition to Defendant’s answer is STRICKEN as unnecessary and improper. 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. 15 16 Dated: May 11, 2015 /s/ Michael J. Seng UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 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?