Herships v. Cantil-Sakauye et al

Filing 45

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S LETTER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS re 44 Letter filed by Howard Herships. Defendants may file joint brief in response by 5/19/17. No other filings on the issues presented will be allowed without Court authorization. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 5/5/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/5/2017)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

HOWARD HERSHIPS,
Plaintiff,

5
6
7
8
9

CASE NO. 17-cv-00473-YGR
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S LETTER ON
DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS

vs.
TANI CANTIL-SAKAUYE, ET AL.,

Re: Dkt. No. 44

Defendants.
On May 3, 2017, plaintiff filed a three-page, single-spaced letter presenting additional
argument and authorities in support of his opposition to defendants’ motions to dismiss. (Dkt. No.

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

44.) Plaintiff previously filed an opposition to the same on April 11, 2017 (Dkt. No. 32), and

12

defendants filed their replies on April 18, 2017 (Dkt. Nos. 39, 40). On April 24, 2017, the Court

13

vacated the hearing on such motions, indicating that it would issue an order based on the parties’

14

submissions. (Dkt. No. 42.) Plaintiff’s filing on May 3, 2017 therefore is in contravention of the

15

Local Rules, which provide thus: “Once a reply is filed, no additional memoranda, papers or

16

letters may be filed without prior Court approval” except in two circumstances not at issue here.

17

Civil L.R. 7-3(d).

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Ordinarily, plaintiff’s filing at Docket Number 44 would be stricken from the record and
sanctions potentially would issue. Given the plaintiff’s pro se status, he is hereby warned that he
must still comply with his obligations under the Local Rules of this District and this Court’s
Standing Orders. Further failures to comply may result in sanctions. Plaintiff should have
requested a reasonable continuance to comply with his obligations.
Given the substantive nature of the letter, defendants may file a joint brief in response not
to exceed six pages by May 19, 2017. No other filings on the issues presented will be allowed
without Court authorization.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 5, 2017
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE