Wilson v. Tilton et al

Filing 53

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/17/10 ordering that plaintiff's 10/07/10 response to defendants' answer 52 shall be disregarded.(Plummer, M)

Download PDF
(PC) Wilson v. Tilton et al Doc. 53 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. JAMES TILTON, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. Plaintiff has filed a response to defendants' answer to the fourth amended complaint. Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides as follows: 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 thirdparty answer. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a) (emphasis added). The court has not ordered plaintiff to reply to defendants' answer and declines to make such an order. ///// 1 Dockets.Justia.com IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DAVID W. WILSON, Plaintiff, No. 2:07-cv-1192 GEB DAD (PC) ORDER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 D AD:hg w ils 1 1 9 2 .7 7 e Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's October 7, 2010 response to defendants' answer shall be disregarded. DATED: October 17, 2010. 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?