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).

Download PDF
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: (415) 344-7000 Facsimile: (415) 344-7050 E-mail: bwilson@perkinscoie.com 5 6 7 8 9 DEBRA R. BERNARD (Pro hac vice) 131 S. Dearborn St., Suite 1700 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 324-8559 Facsimile: (312) 324-9559 E-mail: dbernard@perkinscoie.com 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

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?