Coats v. Chaudhri et al

Filing 80

ORDER STRIKING 79 Plaintiff's Response to Defendants' Answer signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 7/17/2018. (Jessen, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

WILLIAM THOMAS COATS,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

Case No. 1:13-cv-02032-AWI-BAM (PC)
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S
RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER

v.
(ECF No. 79)
CHAUDHRI, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff William Thomas Coats (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

17
18

forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action proceeds

19

against Defendants Convalecer, Fairchild, Gladden, Gundran, and Nguyen (collectively

20

“Defendants”) for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth

21

Amendment.
On July 2, 2018, Defendants answered Plaintiff’s complaint. (ECF No. 77.) On July 16,

22
23

2018, Plaintiff filed a response to Defendants’ answer. (ECF No. 79.)

24

In relevant part, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that there shall be a

25

complaint, an answer to a complaint, and, if the court orders one, a reply to an answer. Fed. R.

26

Civ. P. 7(a). The Court has not ordered a reply to Defendants’ answer and declines to make such

27

an order.

28

///
1

1
2

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s response to Defendants’ answer, filed on July 16, 2018, (ECF No.
79), is HEREBY STRICKEN from the record.

3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Barbara

July 17, 2018

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2