McGibney et al v. Retzlaff

Filing 164

ORDER STRIKING DOCUMENTS 154 , 155 , 156 , 157 , 158 , 159 , 161 , 162 . Signed by Hon. Beth Labson Freeman on 4/15/2015. (blflc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2015)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
JAMES MCGIBNEY, et al.,

7

Case No. 14-cv-01059-BLF

Plaintiffs,
8
v.

ORDER STRIKING DOCUMENTS

9
THOMAS RETZLAFF,

10

Defendant.

[Re: ECF 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 161,
162]

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
The Statements of Recent Decision pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3(d)(2) filed by pro se

13
14

defendant Thomas Retzlaff on March 1 (ECF 154), March 18 (ECF 157), March 25 (ECF 159),

15

and April 12, 2015 (ECF 161) are STRICKEN. Civil Local Rule 7-3(d)(2) provides that:
Before the noticed hearing date, counsel may bring to the Court’s
attention a relevant judicial opinion published after the date the
opposition or reply was filed by filing and serving a Statement of
Recent Decision, containing a citation and providing a copy of the
new opinion—without argument.

16
17
18
19

(emphasis added). Defendant’s filings contain improper argument and are accordingly stricken.1

20

The uninvited additional argument at ECF 155, 156, and 162 based upon Defendant’s stricken

21

non-compliant statements of recent decision are also STRICKEN.2 Because Defendant’s various

22

motions to dismiss and strike are under submission, the Court will accept no further “statements of

23

recent decision,” “declarations,” or other evidence in connection with the submitted motions

24

without first obtaining leave of court upon a showing of good cause.

25
1

26
27

The Court will consider the court opinion—but not Defendant’s argument—that Defendant
submitted in his February 20, 2015 Statement of Recent Decision, ECF 153, to the extent it is
relevant to the issues before the Court.
2

28

Defendant’s administrative motion to strike Plaintiffs’ declaration at ECF 162 is DENIED as
moot. See ECF 163.

1

Defendant’s March 19, 2015 Administrative Motion Notifying Court of Federal Rule of

2

Civil Procedure 4(m) Deadline Violation, ECF 158, is also STRICKEN. Defendant Retzlaff is the

3

only remaining named defendant in this lawsuit, and he has been served. Defendant does not have

4

standing to invoke Rule 4(m) on behalf of any other potential defendant.

5
6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 15, 2015
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2