Coats v. High Desert State Prison et al

Filing 25

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 10/1/2010 ORDERING that pltf's 23 , 24 objections to the answers are DISREGARDED. (Yin, K)

(PC) Coats v. High Desert State Prison et al

Doc. 25

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Defendants. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 / Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 10, 2010 and September 23, 2010, plaintiff filed documents styled as objections to defendants' separately filed answers to the 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' answers and declines to make such an order. ///// 1
Dockets.Justia.com

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WILLIAM THOMAS COATS, Plaintiff, vs. HIGH DESERT STATE PRISON, et al., ORDER No. 2:10-cv-0412 JFM (PC)

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
12 c o a t0 4 1 2 . 7 7 e

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's September 10, 2010 and September 23, 2010 objections to the answers filed in this action are disregarded. DATED: October 1, 2010.

2