Cave v. JPM Chase Bank Investments Division et al
Filing
29
ORDER Granting 19 Motion to Strike 10 Plaintiff's Ex Officio Clerk Petition to Adduce and Enter Exhibits on Record, and 12 Plaintiff's Letter. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 10/25/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
vs.
)
JPM CHASE BANK INVESTMENTS
)
)
DIVISION, et al.,
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)
CHRIS HAROLD CAVE,
Case No. 2:16-cv-01806-RFB-GWF
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant JPM Chase Bank Investments Division’s Motion to
14
Strike (ECF No. 19) Plaintiff’s Ex Officio Clerk Petition to Adduce and Enter Exhibits on Record (ECF No.
15
10) and Plaintiff’s Letter (ECF No. 12), filed on September 23, 2016. To date, no party has filed an
16
opposition to this motion and the time for response has now expired.
17
Under Rule 12(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court may strike from a pleading an
18
insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f).
19
The essential function of a Rule 12(f) motion is to avoid the expenditure of time and money that must arise
20
from litigating spurious issues by dispensing with those issues prior to trial. Fantasy, Inc. v. Fogerty, 984
21
F.2d 1524, 1527 (9th cir. 1993), rev’d on other grounds, 510 U.S. 517, 114 S. Ct. 1023. Striking material
22
pursuant to Rule 12(f) is considered a “drastic remedy” that is “generally disfavored.” Nevada Fair Housing
23
Center, Inc. V. Clark County, 565 F. Supp.2d 1178 (D. Nev. 2008). Whether to grant a motion to strike
24
lies within the sound discretion of the district court. Roadhouse v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep’t, 290
25
F.R.D. 535, 543 (D. Nev. 2013). Additionally, the Court may strike an improper filing under its “inherent
26
power over the administration of its business.” Spurlock v. F.B.I, 69 F.3d 1010, 1016 (9th Cir. 1995).
27
Similar to Rule 12(f) motions to strike, striking material under the Court’s inherent power is wholly
28
discretionary. See Almy v. Davis, No. 2:12–cv–00129–JCM–VCF, 2014 WL 773813, at *4–5 (D.Nev.
1
Feb. 25, 2014); Jones v. Skolnik, No. 3:10-cv-0016-LRH-VPC, 2015 WL 685228, at *2 (D. Nev. Feb.
2
18, 2015).
3
Rule 7(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that only these types of pleadings are allowed:
4
(1) a complaint; (2) an answer to a complaint; (3) an answer to a counterclaim designated as a counterclaim;
5
(4) an answer to a crossclaim; (5) a third-party complaint; (6) an answer to a third-party complaint; and (7) if
6
the court orders one, a reply to an answer. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a). Rule 7(b) sets forth that a motion must be in
7
writing unless it is made during a hearing or trial, must state with particularity the grounds for seeking the order,
8
and state the relief sought. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b). Plaintiff’s Ex Officio Clerk Petition to Adduce and Enter
9
Exhibits on Record (ECF No. 10) is not coherent and does not comply with the Federal Rules of Civil
10
Procedure. Similarly, Plaintiff’s Letter addressed to Defendant’s Counsel, Mr. Larsen, is not coherent and
11
does not comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
12
In addition, Local Rule 7-2(d) provides that “The failure of an opposing party to file points and
13
authorities in response to any motion shall constitute a consent to the granting of the motion.” Plaintiff did not
14
file points and authorities in response to Defendant’s instant motion to strike. Therefore, Plaintiff is considered
15
to have consented to the granting of Defendant’s motion under LR 7-2(d). Accordingly,
16
17
18
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant JPM Chase Bank Investments Division’s Motion to
Strike (ECF No. 19) is granted.
DATED this 25th day of October, 2016.
19
20
21
______________________________________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?