Second Amendment Foundation et al v. Ferguson et al
ORDER denying Plaintiffs' 12 Motion for Leave to File Over-length Brief. Signed by Judge Marsha J. Pechman. (SB)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
FOUNDATION, et al.,
CASE NO. C23-1554 MJP
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO FILE OVERLENGTH
ROBERT FERGUSON, et al.,
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Overlength
Brief. (Dkt. No. 12.) Having reviewed the Motion and all supporting materials, the Court
DENIES the Motion. Plaintiffs ask for leave to file a response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
that is one-and-a-half times the allowed length on the theory that they must “present the detailed
factual background” from their Complaint and “discuss the ‘specific factual allegations’” they
claim Defendants overlooked. (Mot. at 2.) The Court finds little merit in this argument. In
analyzing the Motion to Dismiss, the Court will review Plaintiffs’ Complaint in great detail.
Providing additional space for Plaintiffs to repeat or summarize the Complaint’s allegations is
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OVERLENGTH BRIEF - 1
unnecessary. And any discussion of the Complaint’s specific factual allegations is best presented
in the “legal analysis that responds to State Defendants’ arguments.” (Id.) Lastly, the Court is not
convinced that Plaintiffs’ discussion about the Court’s jurisdiction necessarily requires additional
briefing space. The Court therefore DENIES the Motion in the absence of good cause.
The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to all counsel.
Dated November 13, 2023.
Marsha J. Pechman
United States Senior District Judge
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OVERLENGTH BRIEF - 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?