Boyd v. Etchebehere et al
Filing
19
ORDER Striking Plaintiff's 16 Opposition to Defendant's Answer to Complaint signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 10/14/2014. (Flores, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
CURTIS BOYD,
12
Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
C. ETCHEBEHERE, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
Case No.: 1:13-01966-LJO-SAB (PC)
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S ANSWER
TO COMPLAINT
[ECF No. 16]
Plaintiff Curtis Boyd is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action
17
18
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19
This action is proceeding against Defendant Etchebehere for violation of the First Amendment.
20
On September 10, 2014, Defendant Etchebehere filed an answer to the complaint. On August
21
6, 2014, Plaintiff filed a reply to Defendant’s answer.
22
Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides as follows:
23
There shall be a complaint and an answer; a reply to a counterclaim denominated as
such; an answer to a cross-claim, if the answer contains a cross-claim; a third-party
complaint, if a person who was not an original party is summoned under the provisions
of Rule 14; and a third-party answer, if a third-party complaint is served. No other
pleading shall be allowed, except that the court may order a reply to an answer or a
third-party answer.
24
25
26
27
///
28
1
1
Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a). Because the Court did not order Plaintiff to reply to answer, Plaintiff’s opposition
2
is HEREBY STRICKEN from the record.
3
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
Dated:
6
October 14, 2014
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
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?