Newmark Realty Capital, Inc. v. BGC Partners, Inc. et al

Filing 618

ORDER DENYING 607 PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO SUBMIT NEW EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman on 11/2/2018. (blflc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/2/2018)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3

SAN JOSE DIVISION

4
5

NEWMARK REALTY CAPITAL, INC.,
Plaintiff,

6
7
8
9

Case No. 16-cv-01702-BLF

v.
BGC PARTNERS, INC., et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST TO SUBMIT NEW
EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ITS
MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
[Re: ECF 607]

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

On October 26, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Request to Submit New Evidence of Irreparable
Harm in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment (“Request”). ECF 607. The same day, the
Court filed its Order Denying Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and Denying Plaintiff’s
Motion for Summary Judgment (“Order”). ECF 611.
Plaintiff provides no grounds for why the Court should consider new evidence at this late
stage, two months after the summary judgment hearing. Where, as here, a post-reply submission
does not fall within an itemized exception under Civil Local Rule 7-3(d), the Court may grant or
deny leave to submit the new material in “the exercise of [its] discretion.” See In re Nat’l
Collegiate Athletic Ass’n Athletic Grant-in-Aid Cap Antitrust Litigation, 2018 WL 1524005, at *1
n.2 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 28, 2018).
Exercising its discretion, the Court declines to grant Plaintiff leave to submit new evidence
at this stage. Plaintiff has not articulated sufficient grounds to warrant such leave.

24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 2, 2018
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge