Ferm v. McCarty et al

Filing 129

ORDER Denying 70 Plaintiff's Motion to Strike and Striking 74 Plaintiff's duplicative Motion to Strike. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 01/29/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AC)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9
10

JACK FERM,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
COLLEEN MCCARTY, et al.,
)
)
Defendants. )
__________________________________________)

Case No. 2:12-cv-00782-GMN-PAL
ORDER
(Mtn to Strike - Dkt. ##70, 74)

11
12

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff Jack Ferm’s Motions to Strike the Entire Declaration

13

of Todd Kennedy under Evidence Rule 608 and 701 (Dkt. ##70, 74); Defendants Colleen McCarty’s,

14

KLAS, LLC’s, and Steve Kanigher’s Responses (Dkt. ##98, 99); and Plaintiff’s Reply (Dkt. #107).

15

As an initial matter, the court has reviewed the Motions to Strike, and they are nearly identical.

16

Plaintiff’s Reply clarifies that “[f]or some reason there has been a duplicative motion filed. This was

17

not by intent; Plaintiff only intended to bring the Motion one time and accordingly withdraws the

18

duplicative second motion, so far as it was duplicative.” Reply at 1:21-23.

19

The Motion itself seeks an order striking the declaration of Todd Kennedy. Plaintiff has not

20

specified which declaration of Mr. Kennedy he seeks to have stricken. The court does not have the time

21

or resources to sift through the one hundred filings by the parties to find some declaration somewhere in

22

the flurry of papers that have been filed in this case to date. Plaintiff’s Reply does not clarify which

23

declaration he seeks to strike. Accordingly,

24
25
26
27
28

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike (Dkt. #70) is DENIED, and Plaintiff’s
duplicative Motion to Strike (Dkt. #74) is STRICKEN.
Dated this 29th day of January, 2013.
___________________________________
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE