LHF Productions, Inc. v. Does

Filing 76

ORDER Denying 75 Motion to Strike. Signed by Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe on 7/31/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 9 10 LHF PRODUCTIONS, INC., 11 Plaintiff(s), 12 vs. 13 JOE KOEHLY, et al., 14 Defendant(s). 15 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 2:16-cv-02028-JAD-NJK ORDER (Docket No. 75) 16 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff and Counter–Defendant LHF’s motion to strike two filings 17 by pro se Counter-Claimant and former Defendant, Brian Kabala. Docket No. 75. The motion to strike 18 lacks merit and is hereby DENIED. 19 The motion seeks to strike Kabala’s response to an order issued by United States District Judge 20 Jennifer A. Dorsey and Kabala’s discovery motion. Id.; see also Docket Nos. 73, 74. The legal 21 authority presented in the motion to strike is Rule 12(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which 22 permits the striking of material in “a pleading.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). Because LHF does not seek to 23 strike material in a pleading, however, it “has fallen victim to one of the classic blunders: attempting to 24 extend Rule 12(f)’s striking power beyond pleadings.” United Nat’l Ins. Co. v. Assurance Co. of Am., 25 2014 WL 4960915, at *1 (D. Nev. June 4, 2014) (Dorsey, J.). 26 Moreover, and more significantly, the motion to strike is premised on an erroneous premise that 27 Kabala “is no longer a party to the case.” Id. at 3. That representation is wrong. Judge Dorsey 28 dismissed the claims asserted against Kabala, but has not dismissed his counterclaims against LHF. See 1 Docket No. 72. Indeed, Judge Dorsey expressly ordered that “Kabala must advise this court by 2 August 14 whether he intends to proceed with his counterclaims,” id. (emphasis in original), which 3 the subject filing does, Docket No. 73 at 1 (heading of “Response to ECF No. 72” (emphasis in 4 original)); id. at 3 (“Defendant also intends to proceed with their [sic] counterclaims upon these requests 5 [for admission] being deemed admitted”). Obviously, the Court will not strike a document that Judge 6 Dorsey ordered to be filed. Moreover, with respect to the discovery issues presented by Kabala, LHF 7 asserts that the discovery issues are immaterial since Kabala is no longer a defendant, but fails to 8 acknowledge that the counterclaims remain alive at this time. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 DATED: July 31, 2017 11 ______________________________________ NANCY J. KOPPE United States Magistrate Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 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?