McIntire v. Sunrise Specialty Company

Filing 45

ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 10/11/12 ORDERING the Clerk is directed to strike 44 Amended Reply from the docket. (Matson, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10 BRYAN C. McINTIRE, an
individual,
11
Plaintiff,
12
v.
13
SUNRISE SPECIALTY COMPANY,
14 a California corporation,

O R D E R

Defendant.

15

/

16
17

NO. CIV. S-11-2495 LKK/CKD

In

advance

of

the

October

15,

2012

scheduled

Claim

18 Construction hearing, defendant Sunrise Specialty Company has,
19 without leave or an explanation, filed an “Amended Reply Brief in
20 Support of its Proposed Claim Construction” (Dkt. No. 44).

It is

21 not clear to the court if this filing is meant to replace
22 defendant’s original Reply Brief (Dkt. No. 42), or to supplement
23 it, or to “amend” it, whatever that might mean in this context.
24 The document contains a brand-new Declaration of Charles Robertson
25 Birt, and an Amended Declaration of Ronnie Fischer.
26 ////
1

1

Defendant does not explain what in the original Reply Brief

2 this document replaces, supplements or amends, leaving the court
3 the task of examining every page of the Reply and Amended Reply, as
4 well as all the exhibits to the new and old Declarations, to
5 discover what has been added, replaced or amended, and what remains
6 the same.
7

The court will not engage in such an exercise.

The Clerk is therefore directed to STRIKE the Amended Reply

8 (Dkt. No. 44) from the Docket.1
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:

October 11, 2012.

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

1

If the parties need additional time to brief the claim
construction issues, they can submit a stipulation requesting a new
hearing date and briefing schedule.
2