Janie Aline Pinkney et al v. American Medical Response, Inc.

Filing 266

ORDER granting 262 Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Replies to RoryChetelat and Stephen Minagils Answers to Corrected Second Amended Complaint IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court sua sponte strikes Plaintiffs Reply 257 to American Medical Responses Answer to Corrected Second Amended Complaint. The Clerk of the Court shall strike from the record the following documents: 253 Plaintiffs Reply to Defendant Chetelats Answer to Corrected Second Amended Complaint, 254 Plaintiffs Reply to Defendant C hetelat and Defendant Minagils Answer to Corrected Second Amended Complaint, and 257 Plaintiffs Reply to American Medical Responses Answer to Corrected Second Amended Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 5/7/2010. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SD)

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant Minagil's Answer (#254-1) is filed as an exhibit to a duplicate filing of Plaintiff's reply to Defendant Chetelat's Answer (#254, reproducing #253).
1

JANIE ALINE PINKNEY, et al.,

) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE, INC., et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________________)

Case No. 2:08-cv-01257-RLH-GWF ORDER Motion to Strike (#262)

This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Replies to Rory Chetelat and Stephen Minagil's Answers to Corrected Second Amended Complaint (#262), filed April 20, 2010; Plaintiff Jane Pinkney's Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition and Response to Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Replies to Rory Chetelat and Stephen Minagil's Answers to Corrected Second Amended Complaint (#263), filed April 27, 2010; and Reply Points and Authorities Supporting Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Replies to Rory Chetelat and Stephen Minagil's Answers to Corrected Second Amended Complaint (#264), filed May 5, 2010. Defendants request that the Court strike, as impermissible pleadings, Plaintiff's Replies (#253, 254)1 to Defendant Chetelat and Minagil's Second Amended Answers. (#262). A reply to a defendant's answer is not a permissible pleading under Fed.R.Civ.P. 7. As a result, the Court finds good cause to grant Defendant Chetelat and Minagil's motion. In addition, the Court notes that Plaintiff also filed a Reply (#257) to American Medical Response's Answer to Corrected Second Amended Complaint (#247) and will sua sponte strike it as an invalid pleading. Accordingly,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Replies to Rory Chetelat and Stephen Minagil's Answers to Corrected Second Amended Complaint (#262) is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court sua sponte strikes Plaintiff's Reply (#257) to American Medical Response's Answer to Corrected Second Amended Complaint. The Clerk of the Court shall strike from the record the following documents: 1. Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant Chetelat's Answer to Corrected Second Amended Complaint (#253); 2. Plaintiff's Reply to Defendant Chetelat and Defendant Minagil's Answer to Corrected Second Amended Complaint (#254, 254-1); 3. Plaintiff's Reply to American Medical Response's Answer to Corrected Second Amended Complaint (#257). DATED this 7th day of May, 2010.

______________________________________ GEORGE FOLEY, JR. United States Magistrate Judge

2