Blaszkowski et al v. Mars Inc. et al

Filing 545

MOTION to Strike 543 Notice (Other) and Accompanying Memorandum of Law by Natura Pet Products, Inc.. Responses due by 12/1/2008 (Giel, Michael)

Blaszkowski et al v. Mars Inc. et al

Doc. 545

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION CASE NO. 07-21221-CIV-ALTONAGA/BROWN RENEE BLASZKOWSKI, et al., individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. MARS, INCORPORATED, et al., Defendants. ___________________________________/ NATURA PET PRODUCTS, INC.'S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS' EVIDENTIARY OBJECTION TO REPLY BRIEF AND ACCOMPANYING MEMORANDUM OF LAW Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule ("Rule") 12(f), Defendant Natura Pet Products, Inc. ("Natura") hereby moves to strike the Evidentiary Objection By Plaintiffs To Natura's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment against Non-Natura Plaintiffs Linda Brown, et al. ("Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply") [D.E. 543], filed on November 7, 2008, on the following grounds: 1. Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply constitutes redundant, immaterial, impertinent, and/or

scandalous matter that should be stricken because (a) no evidence was presented in Natura's Reply and (b) Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply fails to object to any evidence. 2. Furthermore, Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply is redundant, immaterial, impertinent, and

scandalous and should be stricken under Rule 12(f) because it seeks only to rebut legal argument raised in Natura's Reply and thus constitutes a sur-reply prohibited by Local Rule 7.1. 3. In support of this motion to strike, Natura submits the attached Memorandum of

Law. This motion to strike is further supported by the filings of record in this case.

1
Dockets.Justia.com

WHEREFORE, Natura respectfully moves this Court for entry of an order striking the Evidentiary Objection by Plaintiffs to Natura Pet Products, Inc.'s Reply in Support of Its Motion for Summary Judgment against Non-Natura Plaintiffs Linda Brown, et al. ("Plaintiffs' Evidentiary Objection"). [D.E. 543.] MEMORANDUM OF LAW I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply is an impermissible legal memorandum in the guise of an "evidentiary objection." Natura filed no evidence with its reply. Therefore, there is simply no evidence to which to object. Instead, Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply contains only argument, quoted case law, and case cites submitted solely for the purpose of rebutting the legal arguments within Natura's reply. Under the Local Rules, Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply cannot be considered and is

irrelevant to these proceedings. As such, it should be stricken. II. BACKGROUND On September 23, 2008, the Plaintiffs filed Plaintiffs' Notice of Pending and Dismissed Claims [D.E. 494] in which Plaintiffs admit that Linda Brown, Tone Gaglione, Jane Herring, Deborah Hock, Raul Isern, Claire Kotzampaltiris, Michele Lucarelli, Marian Lupo, Sharon Mathiesen, Deborah McGregor, Julie Nelson, Ann Quinn, Marlena Rucker, Sandy Shore, Stephanie Stone, Beth Wilson, Patricia Hanrahan, Donna Hopkins-Jones, Danielle Valoras, Carolyn White, and Lou Wiggins cannot prevail on any claims against Natura. Accordingly, Natura filed a motion for summary judgment against those identified plaintiffs on October 10, 2008. [D.E. 515.] Plaintiffs filed their opposition in response to the motion for summary judgment on October 27, 2008. [D.E. 528.] On November 5, 2008, Natura filed its reply brief [D.E. 534] to rebut legal arguments raised in Plaintiffs' opposition to the motion for summary judgment. Though Natura's reply brief was submitted without any accompanying evidence, Plaintiffs filed their Plaintiffs' SurReply as a purported "evidentiary objection" on November 7, 2008. [D.E. 543.]

2

III.

LEGAL ARGUMENT A. Plaintiffs' Filing Is an Unauthorized Sur-Reply and Should Be Stricken.

Rule 12(f) permits the Court to strike from pleadings any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter on its own or upon a party's motion. In addition, Local Rule 7.1 provides: The movant may, within five days after service of an opposing memorandum of law, serve a reply memorandum in support of the motion, which reply memorandum shall be strictly limited to rebuttal of matters raised in the memorandum in opposition without reargument of matters covered in the movant's initial memorandum of law. No further or additional memoranda of law shall be filed without prior leave of Court. (Emphasis added.) While purely evidentiary objections filed in response to evidence presented in a reply brief may be permitted, legal memoranda may not be filed after the filing of the reply brief without leave of Court. Id. Here, Plaintiffs disingenuously characterized their Sur-Reply as an "evidentiary objection" in an attempt to evade Local Rule 7.1's prohibition against sur-replies. Because Natura's reply brief was filed without evidence, and Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply does not actually address any evidence, it cannot be characterized as an "evidentiary objection." Instead, Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply responds to legal argument raised in the reply and includes authority having nothing to do with the admissibility of evidence. Indeed, the only point of Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply is to tenuously argue that plaintiffs who pled no claims against Natura can nonetheless maintain an action and seek recovery against Natura by using discovery responses to amend the pleadings. Natura filed its reply brief on November 5, and Plaintiffs filed their Sur-Reply two days later without leave of Court. Because Plaintiffs' Sur-Reply was filed after the reply brief, it violates Local Rule 7.1. Accordingly, it is redundant, immaterial, impertinent, and/or scandalous to these proceedings, and the Court should order it stricken. IV. CONCLUSION Based upon the foregoing reasons, Defendant Natura Pet Products, Inc. respectfully requests the Court grant this motion and enter an order striking the Evidentiary Objection by

3

Plaintiffs to Natura Pet Products, Inc.'s Reply in Support of Its Motion for Summary Judgment against Non-Natura Plaintiffs Linda Brown, et al. [D.E. 543.] RULE 7.1 CERTIFICATE Prior to filing this motion, Natura's attorney, Robert C. Mardian III, made reasonable efforts to confer with the plaintiffs in a good faith effort to resolve the issues raised in the motion. Plaintiffs did not respond to the meet and confer efforts, thus necessitating the instant motion. McGUIREWOODS LLP By: s/Michael M. Giel Jeffrey S. York Florida Bar No. 0987069 Michael M. Giel Florida Bar No. 0017676 50 N. Laura Street, Suite 3300 Jacksonville, Florida 32202 [phone] [phone] (fax) [e-mail] [e-mail]

and HENDERSON, CAVERLY, PUM & CHARNEY LLP Kristen E. Caverly Admitted Pro Hac Vice Robert C. Mardian III Admitted Pro Hac Vice Post Office Box 9144 Rancho Sante Fe, California 92067 [phone] [phone] (fax) [e-mail] [e-mail] ATTORNEYS AND TRIAL COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT NATURA PET PRODUCTS, INC.

4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on November 13, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system which will send a notice of electronic filing to the counsel so indicated on the attached Service List. s/Michael M. Giel Attorney

5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE RENEE BLASZKOWSKI, ET AL., VS. MARS, INCORPORATED, ET AL. Case No. 1:07-21221-CIV-ALTONAGA/TURNOFF SERVICE LIST

Catherine J. MacIvor, Esquire Jeffrey Eric Foreman, Esquire Jeffrey Bradford Maltzman, Esquire Darren W. Friedman, Esquire Bjorg Eikeland MALTZMAN FOREMAN PA One Biscayne Tower 2 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 2300 Miami, FL 33131-1803 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs Patrick N. Keegan, Esquire Jason E. Baker, Esquire KEEGAN & BAKER, LLP 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 640 San Diego, CA 92122 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Plaintiffs John B.T. Murray, Jr., Esquire SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. 1900 Phillips Point West 777 South Flagler Drive West Palm Beach, Florida 33401-6198 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants PETCO Animal Supplies Stores, Inc., PetSmart, Inc., Wal-Mart

6

Stores, Inc., Target Corporation and Meijer, Inc. Mark C. Goodman, Esquire SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. One Maritime Plaza, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants PETCO Animal Supplies Stores, Inc., PetSmart, Inc., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Target Corporation and Meijer, Inc. Rolando Andres Diaz, Esquire Peter S. Baumberger, Esquire KUBICKI DRAPER 25 W. Flagler Street Penthouse Miami, FL 33130-1712 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Pet Supermarket, Inc. Lonnie L. Simpson, Esquire S. Douglas Knox, Esquire DLA PIPER LLP 100 N. Tampa Street Suite 2200 Tampa, Florida 33602-5809 [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Menu Foods, Inc. and Menu Foods Income Fund Alexander Shaknes, Esquire DLA PIPER LLP 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10020-1104 [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Menu Foods, Inc. and Menu Foods Income Fund

7

William C. Martin, Esquire DLA PIPER LLP 203 North LaSalle Street Suite 1900 Chicago, Illinois 60601-1293 [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Menu Foods, Inc. and Menu Foods Income Fund Hugh J. Turner, Jr., Esquire AKERMAN SENTERFITT 350 E. Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1600 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-2229 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Publix Super Markets, Inc and H.E. Butt Grocery Co. Gary L. Justice, Esquire Gail E. Lees, Esquire Omar Ortega, Esquire DORTA AND ORTEGA, P.A. Douglas Entrance 800 S. Douglas Road, Suite 149 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Mars, Incorporated, Mars Petcare U.S., and Nutro Products, Inc. Benjamine Reid, Esquire Olga M. Vieira, Esquire CARLTON FIELDS, P.A. 100 S.E. Second Street, Suite 4000 Bank of America Tower at International Place Miami, Florida 33131-9101 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Colgate-Palmolive Company and Hill's Pet Nutrition, Inc.

8

John J. Kuster, Esquire James D. Arden, Esquire SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 787 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10019 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Colgate-Palmolive Company and Hill's Pet Nutrition, Inc. Kara L. McCall, Esquire SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP One South Dearborn Chicago, Illinois 60603 Telephone: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Colgate-Palmolive Company and Hill's Pet Nutrition, Inc. Marcos Daniel Jiménez, Esquire Robert J. Alwine II, Esquire KENNY NACHWALTER, P.A. 1100 Miami Center 201 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Safeway, Inc. and The Stop & Shop Supermarket Company LLC Sherril M. Colombo, Esquire COZEN O'CONNOR Wachovia Center, Suite 4410 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Del Monte Foods, Co.

9

Richard Fama, Esquire John J. McDonough, Esquire COZEN O'CONNOR 45 Broadway New York, New York 10006 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Del Monte Foods John F. Mullen, Esquire COZEN O'CONNOR 1900 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Del Monte Foods, Co. Carol A. Licko, Esquire HOGAN & HARTSON L.L.P. Mellon Financial Center 1111 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1900 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Nestlé USA, Inc. and Nestlé Purina Petcare Co. Robert C. Troyer, Esquire HOGAN & HARTSON L.L.P. 1200 17th Street One Tabor Center, suite 1500 Denver, Colorado 80202 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Nestlé USA, Inc. and Nestlé Purina Petcare Co. Craig A. Hoover, Esquire Miranda L. Berge, Esquire E. Desmond Hogan, Esquire HOGAN & HARTSON L.L.P.

10

555 13TH Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20004 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Nestlé USA, Inc. and Nestlé Purina Petcare Co. Alan G. Greer, Esquire RICHMAN GREER, P.A. Miami Center ­ Suite 1000 201 South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Procter & Gamble Co. and The Iams Co. D. Jeffrey Ireland, Esquire Brian D. Wright, Esquire Laura A. Sanom, Esquire FARUKI IRELAND & COX P.L.L. 500 Courthouse Plaza, S.W. 10 North Ludlow Street Dayton, Ohio 45402 [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Procter & Gamble Co. and The Iams Co. Robin L. Hanger, Esquire SQUIRE, SANDERS & DEMPSEY L.L.P. 200 S. Biscayne Boulevard 40th Floor Miami, Florida 33131-2398 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants PETCO Animal Supplies Stores, Inc.

11

Ralph G. Patino, Esquire Dominick V. Tamarazzo, Esquire Carlos B. Salup, Esquire PATINO & ASSOCIATES, P.A. 225 Alcazar Avenue Coral Gables, Florida 33134 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants Pet Supplies "Plus" and Pet Supplies Plus/USA, Inc. Robert Valadez, Esquire Javier Thomas Duran, Esquire SHELTON & VALADEZ, P.C. 600 Navarro, Suite 500 San Antonio, Texas 78205 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant H.E. Butt Grocery Co. Craig P. Kalil, Esquire Joshua D. Poyer, Esquire ABALLI, MILNE, KALIL & ESCAGEDO, P.A. 2250 Sun Trust International Center One Southeast Third Avenue Miami, Florida 33131 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants New Albertson's Inc. and Albertson's LLC W. Randolph Teslik, Esquire Andrew Dober, Esquire AKIN GUMPSTRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20036 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail]

12

[e-mail] Attorneys for Defendants New Albertson's Inc. and Albertson's LLC Jason Joffe, Esquire SQUIRE SANDERS & DEMPSEY, LLP 200 South Biscayne Boulevard Suite 4000 Miami, Florida 33131 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] [e-mail] Attorneys for Defendant Meijer, Inc.

\6706761.1

13