King J.D. et al v. Rumbaugh

Filing 18

ORDER granting plaintiffs' 15 Motion for Leave to File a Reply by Judge Ricardo S Martinez.(RS) cc plaintiffs

1
2
3
4
5
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8
9

CHRISTOPHER KING, J.D., et al.,

10
Plaintiffs,

11
12
13

Case No. C17-031 RSM

v.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION TO FILE REPLY

HON. STANLEY J. RUMBAUGH.,

14
15

Defendant.

16

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Reply

17
18

Memorandum in Support of Remand. Dkt. #15. On January 17, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to

19

Remand. Dkt. #6. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand was noted for February 10, 2017. Defendant

20

Rumbaugh filed a timely response on February 3, 2017. Dkt. #11. On February 10, 2017, Plaintiffs

21
22

filed the instant motion, with a proposed reply attached, seeking leave to file a reply to Defendant

23

Rumbaugh’s response. Dkt. #15 at 1-2, 4-6. Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(d)(3), as long as a

24

reply is filed by the noting date, parties may file a reply without leave of court. Here, Plaintiffs filed

25
26

a timely reply in support of their Motion to Remand. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Reply Memorandum

27

in Support of Remand, which is filed at pages 4 through 6 of Docket #15, will be considered by the

28

Court. Plaintiffs’ motion (Dkt. #15) is accordingly GRANTED. Briefing on Plaintiffs’ Motion to

29
30

Remand now appears to be complete.

ORDER– 1

1
2

DATED this 16th day of February 2017.

3

A

4
5

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
ORDER– 2