Morris et al v. Bank of America et al

Filing 24

ORDER by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong STRIKING 21 Memorandum in Opposition. Plaintiff shall re-file their response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss by 01/19/10. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong, on 1/14/10. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/15/2010) Modified on 1/19/2010 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMIE J. MORRIS AND KATIE MORRIS, Plaintiffs, v. BANK OF AMERICA, successor due to the aquisition of Countrywide Home Loans and FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION a/k/a FANNIE MAE, Defendants. /

No. C 09-2849 SBA ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND MOTION TO STRIKE

On January 8, 2010, plaintiffs, who are represented by legal counsel, filed a 38-page opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and Motion to Strike Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.12(f). The maximum length of an opposition brief is 25 pages. Civ. L.R. 7-3(a), 7-4(b). Because plaintiffs' opposition well exceeds the maximum page limit imposed by the Civil Local Rules, and plaintiffs have neither sought nor received leave to file an oversized brief, the Court strikes plaintiffs' response from the record. See Swanson v. U.S. Forest Serv., 87 F.3d 339, 345 (9th Cir. 1996). In the interest of justice, however, the Court will grant plaintiffs leave to re-file a brief which conforms in all respects to applicable rules of procedure including, without limitation, the Court's Civil Local Rules. Although the maximum page limit for an opposition brief is 25-pages, it is not necessary for plaintiff to file a brief of that length. Indeed, "[o]verly long briefs . . . may actually hurt a party's case, making it `far more likely that meritorious arguments will be lost amid the mass of detail.'" Fleming v. County of Kane, State of Ill., 855 F.2d 496, 497 (7th Cir. 1988) (quoting in part United States v. Keplinger, 776 F.2d 678, 683 (7th Cir. 1985)). ///

Accordingly, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. Plaintiffs' opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended

Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and Motion to Strike Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 12(f) [Docket No. 21] is STRICKEN from the record. 2. By no later than January 19, 2010, plaintiffs shall re-file their response to Defendants'

Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) and Motion to Strike Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 12(f). Said brief shall be no longer than 25 pages and shall conform in all respects to the applicable procedural rules. Failure to file a response in the manner and time prescribed by the Court will be deemed to be consent to the granting of defendants' motions. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 1/14/10 ________________________________ Saundra Brown Armstrong United States District Judge