Rowe v. Clark County School District et al
ORDER Granting 80 Motion to Strike 73 Motion to Vacate; Granting 87 Motion to Strike 82 Letter; and Granting 93 Motion to Strike 91 Letter. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 3/27/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Case No. 2:16-cv-0661-JCM-PAL
(Mot Strike – ECF No. 80)
(Mot Strike – ECF No. 87)
(Mot Strike – ECF No. 93)
CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, et
Before the court is Defendants Clark County School District and Clark County School
District Police Department’s: (1) Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award
[Doc. 73] (ECF No. 80); (2) Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Letter to Your Honor [Doc. 82] (ECF No.
87); and (3) Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Letter to Your Honor [Doc. 91] (ECF No. 93). The court
has reviewed the motions and all Joinders (ECF Nos. 80, 89, 94). No opposition to the Motion to
Strike (ECF No. 80) has been filed and the time for filing an opposition has expired. Pursuant to
LR 7-2(d), “The failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to any
motion, except a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P 56 or a motion for attorney’s fees, constitutes a
consent to the granting of the motion.”
The letters to the court Mr. Rowe filed are not motions authorized by the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure or the Local Rules of Practice. The stated purpose of ECF No. 82 is to provide
additional information regarding the lawsuit to the court. ECF No. 91 tells the court Mr. Rowe is
disgruntled about a number of things, and wants the court to hear his voice. While the court
appreciates that Mr. Rowe is representing himself, and it is difficult to prosecute a federal lawsuit
without counsel, he is required to follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, The Local Rules of
Practice and familiarize himself with the substantive law governing his claims. Filing duplicate
requests for the same relief and letter requests is simply not permitted, wastes the resources of the
court and opposing parties, and unnecessarily delays resolution of cases on the merits.
Having reviewed and considered the matter,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendants Clark County School District and Clark County School
District Police Department’s:
1. Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate Arbitration Award [Doc. 73] (ECF No.
80) is Granted.
2. Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Letter to Your Honor [Doc. 82] (ECF No. 87) is Granted.
3. Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Letter to Your Honor [Doc. 91] (ECF No. 93) is Granted.
DATED this 27th day of March, 2017.
PEGGY A. LEEN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?