Stevens v. Skolnik et al

Filing 149

ORDER granting 147 Motion to Strike 146 Sur-Reply. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 2/3/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9
10

) 3:09-cv-00227-RCJ-WGC
)
) ORDER
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

COUNTRY STEVENS,
Plaintiff,
vs.

11

HOWARD SKOLNIK, et. al.
12

Defendants.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Before the court is Defendants' Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Response to Defendants'
Reply in Support of Summary Judgment. (Doc. # 147.) 1
Defendants filed their motion for summary judgment on June 26, 2013. (Doc. # 138.)
Plaintiff filed a response. (See Docs. # 142 (affidavit), # 143 (brief in opposition).) Defendants

20

subsequently filed their reply brief. (Doc. # 145.) At that point, the motion was considered fully
21
22
23
24
25

briefed. Plaintiff subsequently filed a response to Defendants' reply. (Doc. # 146.)
Local Rule 7-2 contemplates the filing of a motion, opposition and reply briefs, but not a
sur-reply, as Plaintiff has filed here. Plaintiff did not seek leave of court to file his sur-reply.
The court has reviewed the sur-reply, and the document itself provides no good cause

26
27
28

justifying leave to file an additional brief. Instead, Plaintiff reiterates the arguments he asserted
1

Refers to court's docket number.

1

1
2

in his opposition brief with some elaboration. There is no argument asserted in Defendants' reply
brief that Plaintiff could not have originally addressed in his opposition brief.

3

Accordingly, Defendants' motion to strike the sur-reply (Doc. # 147) is GRANTED and
4
5

the Clerk shall STRIKE Plaintiff's sur-reply (Doc. # 146).

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7

DATED: February 3, 2014.

8
9
10

WILLIAM G. COBB
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2