Custom Blending and Packaging of St. Louis, LLC v. Steven Moser, Jr. et al

Filing 106

ORDER striking 105 Reply to Response to Motion filed by DAC Aerosol & Liquid Fill, Inc., Dennis Harold Litz, DAC Industries, Inc.. Signed by Chief Judge David R. Herndon on 8/4/10. (klh, )

Custom Blending and Packaging of St. Louis, LLC v. Steven Moser, Jr. et al

Doc. 106

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS CUSTOM BLENDING AND PACKAGING OF ST. LOUIS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. STEVEN MOSER, JR., et al., Defendants. No. 08-0592-DRH

ORDER HERNDON, Chief Judge: This matter comes before the Court for case management. On August 3, 2010, Defendants DAC Industries, Inc., DAC Aerosol & Liquid Fill, Inc., and Litz filed a reply to Plaintiff's response to their motion for summary judgment (Doc. 105). Local Rule 7.1 (c) states in part: Reply briefs are not favored and should be filed only in exceptional circumstances. The party filing the reply brief shall state the exceptional circumstances. Here, Defendants' reply brief does not state the exceptional circumstances as to why a reply brief is needed. Further, the reply violates Local Rule 7.1(c) in that it is seven

Dockets.Justia.com

pages.1 Thus, the Court STRIKES the reply. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed this 4th day of August, 2010.

/s/ DavidRHer|do| Chief Judge United States District Court

Local Rule 7.1(c) also states: "Reply briefs shall not exceed 5 pages. Requests for additional pages are not allowed."

1