Cloudera, Inc. v. Databricks, Inc. et al
ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS 94 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO STRIKE NEW ARGUMENTS. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/3/2021)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S
ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO
STRIKE NEW ARGUMENTS
DATABRICKS, INC., et al.,
Re: Dkt. No. 94
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Case No. 21-cv-01217-HSG
On May 27, 2021, Plaintiff filed an Administrative Motion to Strike New Arguments in
Defendant’s Reply in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint or,
Alternatively, For Leave to File Sur-Reply. Dkt. No. 94 (“Mot.”); 96 (“Opp.”). The Court
GRANTS IN PART Plaintiff’s Administrative Motion as follows: The alternative argument on
pages 5:15-7:2, and the subheading on page 5, of Defendant Databricks, Inc.’s Reply in Further
Support of its Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint, see Dkt. No. 92, is stricken from the
Reply Brief and will not be considered by the Court.1 Given this ruling, Plaintiff’s alternative
request for leave to file a sur-reply is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge
The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s request to strike page 5:6-14 and the remainder of the
parenthetical on line 15 and footnote four.
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?