PARR v. EBRAHIMIAN et al

Filing 125

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 123 defendants Mashaallah Ebrahamian and Rimcor LLC's motion to strike plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, to set a briefing schedule. De fendants shall file their opposition to the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment on or before March 3, 2014; plaintiff shall file her reply to the defendants' opposition on or before March 24, 2014. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on January 31, 2014. (MA)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
_________________________________________
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
MASHAALAH EBRAHAMIAN et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_________________________________________ )
KEELY D. PARR,

Civil Action No. 07-1718 (PLF)

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendants Mashaallah Ebrahamian and Rimcor LLC have filed a motion to
strike plaintiff Keely Parr’s cross-motion for summary judgment, or, in the alternative, to set a
briefing schedule. Dkt. No. 123. The defendants note that Ms. Parr filed an opposition to their
own motion for summary judgment in which she simultaneously cross-moved for summary
judgment, but argue that (1) one cannot both oppose and move in the same document (which
generally is correct), and (2) her cross-motion is untimely given that the Scheduling Order
established by this Court set a deadline of November 20, 2013, for the filing of all dispositive
motions. See Minute Order (Sept. 29, 2013).
Although the defendants are correct to point out that Ms. Parr’s cross-motion is
untimely, the Court acknowledges that the plaintiff is proceeding pro se, and that pro se litigants
are generally held to less stringent standards than are hired counsel. See Koch v. Walter, 934 F.
Supp. 2d 261, 266 (D.D.C. 2013). 1 The Court therefore will deny the defendants’ motion to the
extent it seeks to strike the plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment, and, instead, it will
1

The Court notes, however, that Ms. Parr is trained as an attorney and has been
litigating this case for several years.

set a schedule pursuant to which defendants will be able to respond to Ms. Parr’s cross-motion.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that defendants Mashaallah Ebrahamian and Rimcor LLC’s Motion
to Strike Plaintiff’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, or, in the Alternative, to Set a
Briefing Schedule [Dkt. No. 123] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART; it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the defendants shall file their opposition to the
plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment on or before March 3, 2014; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff shall file her reply to the defendants’
opposition on or before March 24, 2014.
SO ORDERED.

/s/____________________________
PAUL L. FRIEDMAN
United States District Judge
DATE: January 31, 2014

2