Roark v. The Attorney General of California

Filing 16

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 8/9/2016 GRANTING respondent's 15 motion to strike the sur-reply. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ROBERT ROARK,

12

No. 2:16-cv-0721 KJM CKD P

Petitioner,

13

v.

14

RON RACKLEY,

15

ORDER

Respondent.

16
17

On July 14, 2016, the court recommended that respondent’s motion to dismiss be granted.

18

Shortly thereafter, petitioner filed a sur-reply regarding the motion to dismiss. Because the court

19

does not normally permit sur-replies, see Local Rule 230(1), and there is no reason to deviate

20

from that rule here, respondent’s motion that the sur-reply be stricken (ECF No. 15) is granted.

21

Dated: August 9, 2016

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1
roar0721.mts