Kaighn et al v. Apple, Inc. et al

Filing 85

ORDER signed by District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 11/21/2016. The multiplicity of plaintiffs' filings is a burden on both the court and defendants and impedes the proper prosecution of this action. Plaintiffs' future filings shall ther efore be limited. Plaintiffs have also sent several e-mails directly to the court's official e-mail address, which the court has docketed at ECF No. 84. This type of communication to the court's official e-mail address is not provided for by the Local Rules. The court will block all future communications from plaintiffs to the court's official e-mail. Plaintiffs are limited to submitted any proper filings, subject to the Local Rules and this Order, using the courts CM/ECF system.(Andrews, P)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

JANIS KAIGHN and GREGORY R.
KAIGHN,
Plaintiffs,

13

ORDER
v.

14
15

No. 2:16-cv-02370-KJM-EFB

APPLE, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

16

Plaintiffs have filed numerous “notices,” “statements,” “requests,” and

17
18

“applications” since commencement of this action. Many of the filings are not pertinent to issues

19

before the court, are duplicative, or are not properly noticed for hearing. See ECF Nos. 5, 7, 11,

20

31, 69, 72, 74, 81–82 (notices); ECF Nos. 12, 83 (statements); ECF Nos. 6, 63–65, 80 (requests);

21

ECF No. 32 (application).
The multiplicity of plaintiffs’ filings is a burden on both the court and defendants

22
23

and impede the proper prosecution of this action. Plaintiffs’ future filings shall therefore be

24

limited. Plaintiffs may only file the following documents:

25

a. Proofs of service regarding summons;

26

b. One opposition to any motion filed by defendants (and clearly titled as such);

27

and

28

/////
1

1

c. Only one motion pending at any time. Such motion must be properly noticed

2

for hearing. Plaintiffs are limited to one memorandum of points and authorities in support of the

3

motion and one reply to any opposition.

4
5
6

Failure to comply with this order shall result in improperly filed documents being
stricken from the record and may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.
Plaintiffs have also sent several e-mails directly to the court’s official e-mail

7

address, which the court has docketed at ECF No. 84. This type of communication to the court’s

8

official e-mail address is not provided for by the Local Rules and will be disregarded by the court.

9

Accordingly, the court will block all future communications from plaintiffs to the court’s official

10

e-mail. Plaintiffs are limited to submitted any proper filings, subject to the Local Rules and this

11

Order, using the court’s CM/ECF system.

12
13

IT IS ORDERED.
Dated: November 21, 2016.

14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2