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)

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