England v. Foster et al

Filing 60

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke, on 3/23/2015, granting Plaintiff's 57 Motion to Attach; striking Plaintiff's 46 Motion for Summary Judgment. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA WILLIAM ENGLAND, 3:13-cv-00188-RCJ-VPC Plaintiff, MINUTES OF THE COURT v. SHERYL FOSTER, et al., Defendants. PRESENT: March 23, 2015 THE HONORABLE VALERIE P. COOKE, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEPUTY CLERK: LISA MANN REPORTER: NONE APPEARING COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF(S): NONE APPEARING COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT(S): NONE APPEARING MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS: Before the court is plaintiff’s motion to attach a certificate of service to his opposition to defendants’ summary judgment motion (#57), and also plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (#46). First, as the motion to attach (#57) is unopposed, the motion is GRANTED. The court shall consider plaintiff’s opposition to defendants’ motion. Second, the court has reviewed plaintiff’s summary judgment motion and observes that the brief is excessive in length. Although approximately one and one-half pages are blank, the brief nevertheless exceeds the permissible limit by over ten pages. Local Rule 7-4 provides that, “[u]nless otherwise ordered by the Court, pretrial . . . briefs and points and authorities . . . shall be limited to thirty (30) pages including the motion but excluding exhibits.” The court takes judicial notice that plaintiff, although a pro se party, is not an inexperienced litigant in federal court. Accordingly, the court finds no basis for excusing his compliance with the Local Rules. Because plaintiff failed to request leave to submit a lengthier brief, the motion and brief (#46) are STRICKEN. IT IS SO ORDERED. LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK By: /s/ Deputy Clerk

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?