Baker v. Hopkins et al

Filing 245

ORDER denying Defendants' 244 Motion for Leave to File Over-length Motion. Signed by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (KRA)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 8 9 10 JAMALL S. BAKER, Plaintiff, 11 12 13 14 CASE NO. C21-361 MJP v. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OVERLENGTH MOTION TAMMY O'REILLY, et al., Defendants. 15 16 This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to File Overlength Brief. 17 (Dkt. No. 244.) Defendants seek an addition 1,050 words to file a motion for reconsideration of 18 the Court’s Order on their Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Defendants justify this request 19 on the theory that the Court “inadvertently overlooked LCR 7(g)(4), which permits the Court to 20 order a response to a surreply motion” and therefore they should have additional space in which 21 to seek reconsideration. (Mot. at 1.) Defendants are wrong—the Court overlooked nothing. Local 22 Civil Rule 7(g)(4) states: “No response [to a surreply] shall be filed unless requested by the 23 court.” Here, the Court believed no response was necessary or appropriate, particularly since the 24 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OVERLENGTH MOTION - 1 1 surreply raised an issue that did not affect the outcome of the merits of Defendants’ Motion for 2 Partial Summary Judgment. Defendants are entitled to move for reconsideration, but they must 3 do so within the word limits set forth in the Local Civil Rules. Defendants should also heed the 4 fact that motions for reconsideration are disfavored. LCR 7(h)(1). For these reasons the Court 5 DENIES the Motion. 6 The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel. 7 Dated January 28, 2025. 8 A 9 Marsha J. Pechman United States Senior District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OVERLENGTH MOTION - 2

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?