Pimental v. Google, Inc. et al

Filing 46

MOTION to Strike 40 Memorandum in Opposition, filed by Google, Inc., Slide, Inc.. Responses due by 12/6/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Proposed Order)(Wilson, Bobbie) (Filed on 12/2/2011) Modified on 12/5/2011 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4

PERKINS COIE LLP
BOBBIE J. WILSON (Bar No. 148317)
JOSHUA A. REITEN (Bar No. 238985)
Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 2400
San Francisco, CA 94111-4131
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail:
[e-mail]

5
6
7
8
9

DEBRA R. BERNARD (Pro hac vice)
131 S. Dearborn St., Suite 1700
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-mail:
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendants
GOOGLE INC. and SLIDE, INC.

10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13

OAKLAND DIVISION

14
15
16

NICOLE PIMENTAL and JESSICA
FRANKLIN, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated,

17
18
19

Plaintiffs,

Case No. 11-cv-02585-SBA
DEFENDANTS’ ADMINISTRATIVE
MOTION FOR AN ORDER STRIKING
PLAINTIFFS’ BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

v.
GOOGLE INC., a Delaware corporation,
and SLIDE, INC., a Delaware corporation,

Place:
Judge:

20
Defendants.
21
22

This Document Relates to All Actions.

23
24
25
26
27
28
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ BRIEF
Case No. 11-cv-02585-SBA

Courtroom 1, 4th Floor
Hon. Saundra Brown Armstrong

1

By this Administrative Motion, Defendants respectfully request that the Court enter an

2

order striking, or in the alternative disregarding the excessive pages of, Plaintiffs’ overlong brief

3

in opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint (Dkt.

4

40), on the grounds that it violates this Court’s Standing Orders effective July 1, 2011 regarding

5

maximum page limits. See Dkt. 10 at 5.

6

****

7

On August 22, 2011, the Court filed and served a copy of its Standing Orders. See

8

Dkt. 10. Among those orders is a page limitation for briefs: “All noticed motions (other than

9

motions for summary judgment) and any opposition thereto, shall not exceed fifteen (15) pages

10

in length, exclusive of the table of contents, table of authorities, exhibits and declarations, if

11

required.” Id. at 5 (emphasis in original).

12

On October 14, 2011, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Class

13

Action Complaint. Dkt. 29. In accordance with this Court’s Standing Orders regarding

14

maximum page limits, Defendants limited the brief supporting that motion to 15 pages in length.

15

On November 11, 2011, Plaintiffs filed their opposition to Defendants’ motion to dismiss.

16

Dkt. 40. Plaintiffs could have sought leave to file an overlong brief or limited their brief to 15

17

pages. Instead, in violation of the Court’s Standing Orders, Plaintiffs filed a brief that spans 23

18

pages (excluding tables of contents and authorities).

19

Plaintiffs’ filing of a brief that is overlong by eight pages—not a de minimus ½ or one

20

page (in which case Defendants would not have bothered the Court with a motion such as this)—

21

warrants that the Court strike the brief or disregard the excess pages. See Dkt. 10 at 5 (“[f]ailure

22

to comply with this Order or the Local Rules of this Court may result in sanctions”); cf. Wheeler

23

v. Chertoff, No. 08-cv-1738 SBA, 2009 WL 2157548, *2 n.1 (N.D. Cal. Jul. 17, 2009) (observing

24

that party’s brief exceeded the maximum page limit in violation of Local Rules and cautioning

25

“that the Court will not consider briefs that fail to comport with the Federal Rules of Civil

26

Procedure, Local Rules or the Standing Orders of this Court”) (emphasis added). Defendants

27

therefore respectfully request that the Court strike Plaintiffs’ opposition brief in its entirety, or,

28
-1ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ BRIEF
Case No. 11-cv-02585-SBA

1

alternatively, strike and refuse to consider the final eight pages of the brief.

2
3

DATED: December 2, 2011

PERKINS COIE LLP

4
5
6
7

By: /s/ Bobbie J. Wilson
BOBBIE J. WILSON
Attorneys for Defendants
GOOGLE INC. and SLIDE, INC.

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ BRIEF
Case No. 11-cv-02585-SBA