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)
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?