Eliahu v. Israel

Filing 36

ORDER STRIKING 34 PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS AND 35 OPPOSITION TO EVIDENCE IN JUDICIAL NOTICE; CLARIFYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON MOTIONS BEFORE THE COURT. Plaintiff's revised opposition to Defendant's Motion to D ismiss due by 11/10/2014. Defendant's reply to Motion to Dismiss due by 12/8/2014. Defendant's opposition to 33 Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint due by 11/20/2014. Plaintiff's reply to Motion to Amend Complaint due by 12/1/2014. Motion Hearing set for 1/22/2015 09:00 AM in Courtroom 3, 5th Floor, San Jose before Hon. Beth Labson Freeman. Signed by Hon. Beth Labson Freeman on 11/3/2014. (blflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/3/2014)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
EITAN OVADIA ELIAHU,

7

Case No. 14-cv-01636-BLF

Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
THE STATE OF ISRAEL,

10

Defendant.
11

ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF'S
OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO
DISMISS AND OPPOSITION TO
EVIDENCE IN JUDICIAL NOTICE;
CLARIFYING BRIEFING SCHEDULE
ON MOTIONS BEFORE THE COURT

United States District Court
Northern District of California

[Re: ECF 33, 34, 35]
12
On November 2, 2014, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a thirty-two (32) page Opposition

13
14

to Motion to Dismiss, ECF 34, and a separate Opposition to Evidence in Judicial Notice, ECF 35.

15

These filings violate Civil Local Rule 7-3, which provides that opposition briefs “may not exceed

16

25 pages of text” and that “[a]ny evidentiary and procedural objections to the motion must be

17

contained within the brief or memorandum.” These filings are therefore STRICKEN. Plaintiff

18

shall have until November 10, 2014 to file a revised opposition brief that does not exceed 25

19

pages of text, inclusive of any objections to Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice, and is

20

appropriately formatted according to Civil Local Rules 3-4 and 7-2.1 The deadline for

21

Defendant’s reply brief is accordingly extended to December 8, 2014.

22

On November 2, 2014, Plaintiff also filed a Motion to Amend Complaint. ECF 33.

23

Plaintiff appears to have set a number of dates in error in electronically filing his motion. For the

24

elimination of any doubt, the Court hereby sets the following schedule for briefing and hearing on

25

Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint:

26
27
28

1

Plaintiff is again reminded to review the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Civil Local Rules,
and this Court’s standing orders, which may all be found on the court’s website. Pro se parties are
equally bound by the Federal Rules, as well as by all applicable local rules. Civ. L.R. 3-9(a).

1

Defendant’s Opposition Due: November 20, 2014

2

Plaintiff’s Reply Due: December 1, 2014

3

Motion Hearing: January 22, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 3, 5th Floor, San Jose.

4
5
6
7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 3, 2014
______________________________________
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