Intrepid Ship Management, Inc. et al v. Plant Recovery Company et al

Filing 234

ORDER granting 198 Motion to Strike both PRC Environmental, Inc.s (Dkt. 196) and Prospector Rig Mgt., LLCs (Dkt. 197) Consolidated Reply in Support of Objections to Report and Recommendation as to Ownership of the Rig and Standing ; striking 196 Reply, 197 Objections to Report and Recommendations.(Signed by Magistrate Judge John R Froeschner) Parties notified.(sanderson, 3)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

ENTERED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

February 12, 2016
David J. Bradley, Clerk

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
GALVESTON DIVISION
INTREPID SHIP MANAGEMENT, INC., §
VESSEL MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. §
and CROWLEY MARITIME CORP.
§
§
V.
§
§
OCEAN PROSPECTOR, her equipment,
§
tackle, appurtenances, et., in rem, and
§
PLANT RECOVERY COMPANY,
§
in personam
§

CIVIL ACTION NO. G-12-243
(Consolidated with G-12-cv-359)

ORDER
Before the Court is “Malin International Ship Repair & Drydock, Inc.’s Motion to Strike
both PRC Environmental, Inc.’s (Dkt. 196) and Prospector Rig Mgt., LLC’s (Dkt. 197)
“Consolidated Reply in Support of Objections to Report and Recommendation as to Ownership
of the Rig and Standing”.
Because Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not authorize the filing
of a reply brief in support of objections to a pending Report and Recommendation regarding a
dispositive motion, Malin’s Motion (Instrument no. 198) is GRANTED. See Cannon Partners,
Ltd. v. Cape Cod Biolab Corp., 225 F.R.D. 247, 250 (N.D. Cal. 2003).
DONE at Galveston, Texas, this

12th

day of February, 2016.