Do v. Hollins Law, P.C.

Filing 42

ORDER VACATING HEARING ON MOTION TO DIMISS; DENYING OBJECTIONS TO REPLY; AND DENYING AS MOOT SECOND MOTION TO APPEAR BY PHONE. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 7/18/13. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/18/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

VIEN DO,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13

No. C 13-01322 JSW
Plaintiff,

ORDER VACATING HEARING
ON MOTION TO DISMISS;
DENYING OBJECTION TO
REPLY; AND DENYING AS
MOOT SECOND MOTION TO
APPEAR BY PHONE

v.
HOLLINS LAW P.C.,
Defendant.
/

14
15

This matter is scheduled for a hearing on July 26, 2013 to consider Defendant’s Motion

16

to Dismiss. The Court finds the motion suitable for disposition without oral argument, and it

17

HEREBY VACATES the hearing. See N.D. Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). The Court shall issue a written

18

ruling in due course. The Court also has considered Plaintiff’s objection to Defendant’s reply,

19

and it denies the objection and denies Plaintiff’s request to strike that brief. Defendant

20

responded to a legal argument raised by Plaintiff in the opposition, rather than presenting new

21

evidence. Further, the Court concludes that a sur-reply is not necessary, because it does not

22

require additional legal argument on that issue. Finally, the Court DENIES AS MOOT the

23

motion to appear by telephone filed by Defendant.

24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 18, 2013
JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE