Graham-Sult et al v. Clainos et al

Filing 84

ORDER STRIKING PARTIES' LETTERS FILED WITHOUT LEAVE ( 81 Letter filed by Nicholas P. Clainos, 83 Letter filed by Nicholas P. Clainos, 82 Letter, filed by David Graham, Alexander Graham-Sult). Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 4/12/2011. (cwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/12/2011)

Download PDF
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 5 ALEXANDER GRAHAM-SULT and DAVID GRAHAM, 6 Plaintiffs, 7 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 No. C 10-04877 CW ORDER STRIKING PARTIES’ LETTERS FILED WITHOUT LEAVE (Docket Nos. 81-83) v. NICHOLAS P. CLAINOS, an individual; RICHARD L. GREENE, an individual; LINDA MCCALL, an individual; GREENE RADOVSKY MALONEY SHARE & HENNINGH LLP, a limited liability partnership; BILL GRAHAM ARCHIVES LLC, d/b/a WOLFGANG’S VAULT, a limited liability company; NORTON LLC, a limited liability company; and WILLIAM E. SAGAN, an individual 13 Defendants. / 14 15 16 Plaintiffs Alexander Graham-Sult and David Graham and 17 Defendant Nicholas Clainos have filed letters on various issues.1 18 These letters and related filings violate Civil L.R. 7-3(d), which 19 provides that, subject to two exceptions, once “a reply is filed, 20 no additional memoranda, papers or letters may be filed without 21 prior Court approval.” 22 the letters and related filings, which appear at Docket Nos. 81-83, 23 from the record. 24 Accordingly, the Court sua sponte strikes Although Plaintiffs seek leave in their letter to proffer 25 26 27 28 1 Defendants Richard L. Greene, Linda McCall and Greene Radovsky Maloney Share & Henningh LLP also have filed a letter regarding the propriety of granting a non-moving party leave to amend a complaint in light of an anti-SLAPP motion to strike. However, these Defendants have sought leave to do so. 1 evidence in opposition to Defendants’ motions to strike, 2 Plaintiffs’ request is not presented in a motion and is, 3 accordingly, not properly before the Court. 4 Within four days of the date of this Order, Plaintiffs may file an 5 administrative motion, pursuant to Civil L.R. 7-11, seeking leave 6 to supplement the record. 7 with Civil L.R. 7-11(b). 8 Order, Plaintiffs may file an opposition, conforming to the same 9 Local Rule, to the Greene Defendants’ letter. United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 Civil L.R. 7-1(a). Defendants may respond in accordance Also within four days of the date of this IT IS SO ORDERED. 11 12 Dated: April 12, 2011 CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?