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)
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?