Clark Fratus et al v. County of Contra Costa et al

Filing 76

ORDER re 75 Amended Opposition to Motion. Defendants shall file an amended reply by 6/9/2016. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 5/23/2016. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/23/2016)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5
6

CLARK FRATUS, et al.,

Case No. 14-cv-05533-MEJ

Plaintiffs,
7

ORDER RE: AMENDED OPPOSITION
TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

v.
8
9

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, et al.,

Re: Dkt. No. 75

Defendants.
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

Pending before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Dkt. No. 48.

13

Briefing in this matter has been complete since Defendants filed their Reply on April 28, 2016,

14

and the matter is set for a hearing on July 14, 2016. However, on May 22, 2016, Plaintiffs filed an

15

Amended Opposition to Defendants’ Motion. Dkt. No. 75. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3(d),

16

“Once a reply is filed, no additional memoranda, papers or letters may be filed without prior Court

17

approval,” except in limited circumstances not applicable here. As Plaintiffs did not seek leave to

18

file an amended opposition, the Court would normally order it stricken from the record. Since

19

Plaintiffs represent themselves in this matter and the hearing is seven weeks away, thus giving

20

Defendants ample time to amend their reply, the Court shall permit Plaintiffs to file their amended

21

opposition. Plaintiffs are hereby advised that any future filings that do not comply with the federal

22

and local rules shall be stricken from the record. Defendants shall file an amended reply by June

23

9, 2016.

24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26
27
28

Dated: May 23, 2016
______________________________________
MARIA-ELENA JAMES
United States Magistrate Judge