McGibney et al v. Retzlaff

Filing 34

ORDER STRIKING 32 Objection, filed by Lane Lipton. Signed by Hon. Beth Labson Freeman on 8/14/2014. (blflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/14/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 JAMES MCGIBNEY, et al., Case No. 14-cv-01059-BLF Plaintiffs, 8 v. 9 10 THOMAS RETZLAFF, et al., Defendants. ORDER STRIKING DEFENDANT LIPTON'S EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS [Re: ECF 32] United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 Civil Local Rule 7-3(c) provides that “[a]ny evidentiary and procedural objections to the 14 opposition must be contained within the reply brief or memorandum.” Civ. L.R. 7-3(c). 15 Defendant Lane Lipton’s nine page “Evidentiary Objections to Plaintiffs’ Evidence,” (ECF 32), 16 filed separately from her reply brief and incorporated by reference therein, violates this rule and is 17 accordingly STRICKEN. 18 If Defendant Lipton wishes to preserve her evidentiary objections, she may file a revised 19 reply brief within ten (10) days of the date of this order. Any revised brief may not contain new 20 argument and must comply with the formatting requirements and page limits set forth in the local 21 rules. See Civ. L.R. 3-4, 7-3(c). 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 14, 2014 ______________________________________ BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge

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?