Matthews v. Holland

Filing 35

ORDER STRIKING Plaintiff's 34 Unsigned Motion for Court Reply, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 5/19/17. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6

IVAN LEE MATTHEWS,

7

Plaintiff,

8
9

v.
HOLLAND, et al.,

10

Case No. 1:14-cv-01959-SKO (PC)
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S
UNSIGNED MOTION FOR COURT
REPLY
(Doc. 34)

Defendants.

11
Plaintiff, Ivan Lee Matthews, is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis

12
13

in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983. On May 18, 2017, Plaintiff filed an

14

unsigned motion “for court reply.” (Doc. 34.) The Court cannot consider unsigned filings and

15

Defendants need not file a response to an unsigned pleading. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a); Local Rule

16

131(b). It appears, however, from Plaintiff’s filing that he has received neither the Discovery and

17

Scheduling Order which issued in this case on April 26, 2017, nor the order denying his request

18

for entry of default which issued on May 3, 2017.
Thus, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for court’s reply, filed on May 18,

19
20

2017, is STRICKEN FROM THE RECORD in this action. The Clerk’s Office is directed to

21

serve copies of the Discovery and Scheduling Order (Doc. 28) and the order denying his request

22

for entry of default (Doc. 32) on Plaintiff.

23
24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 19, 2017

/s/

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

26
27
28
1

.