Server Technology, Inc. v. American Power Conversion Corporation

Filing 416

ORDER DENYING 388 Request for Status Conference; GRANTING nunc pro tunc 392 Motion to Extend Time; GRANTING 395 Motion to Strike or, Alternatively, for Leave to Submit Sur-Reply. Plaintiff/counter-defendant Server Technology, Inc. shall have 10 days after entry of this order to file a sur-reply of not more than 10 pages in response to defendant's reply to its motion for reconsideration. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 06/04/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

9

SERVER TECHNOLOGY, INC., a Nevada
corporation,

10
Plaintiff and Counterdefendant,
11
v.
12
13

AMERICAN POWER CONVERSION
CORPORATION, a Massachusetts
corporation,

14
Defendant and Counterclaimant

3:06-CV-00698-LRH-VPC
ORDER

15
16
17

Before the court is plaintiff and counter-defendant Server Technology, Inc.’s (“STI”)
motion to strike or, in the alternative, for leave to file a sur-reply. Doc. #395.

18

A court has the inherent authority to grant leave to a party to file a sur-reply when the

19

information in that sur-reply would be germane to the evaluation of a pending matter. See Cedars-

20

Sinai Medical Center v. Shalala, 177 F.3d 1126, 1129 (9th Cir. 1999).

21

Here, the court has reviewed the documents and pleadings on file in this matter and finds

22

that a sur-reply would be germane to the court’s evaluation of defendant’s pending motion for

23

reconsideration. Therefore, the court shall grant STI’s motion and allow STI to file a short sur-

24

reply of not more than ten (10) pages in response to defendant’s reply to its motion for

25

reconsideration.

26

///

1

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff/counter-defendant’s motion to strike or, in

2

the alternative, for leave to file a sur-reply (Doc. #395) is GRANTED. Plaintiff/counter-defendant

3

Server Technology, Inc. shall have ten (10) days after entry of this order to file a sur-reply of not

4

more than ten (10) pages in response to defendant’s reply to its motion for reconsideration.

5
6
7
8
9
10

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant and counter-claimant’s motion to extend time
(Doc. #392) is GRANTED nunc pro tunc.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties request for a status conference (Doc. #388) is
DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED this 4th day of June, 2013.

11
12
13

__________________________________
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

2