FORTE AUTOMATION SYSTEMS, INC. v. ProNOVA SOLUTIONS, LLC, 14 cv 50330. (2015)
Court: District Court, N.D. Illinois
Number: infdco20150511729
Visitors: 15
Filed: Apr. 23, 2015
Latest Update: Apr. 23, 2015
Summary: ORDER IAIN D. JOHNSTON , Magistrate Judge . Defendant filed an affirmative defense consisting solely of a reference to paragraphs one through eighty-six of its counterclaim. Dkt. 32 at 9-10. The plaintiff filed a motion to strike it [41] as redundant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), citing in support Wilbert Funeral Services, Inc. v. Custom Services Unlimited, LLC, No. 10 CV 3272, 2010 WL 4627663, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 5, 2010) (striking as redundant an affirmative defense th
Summary: ORDER IAIN D. JOHNSTON , Magistrate Judge . Defendant filed an affirmative defense consisting solely of a reference to paragraphs one through eighty-six of its counterclaim. Dkt. 32 at 9-10. The plaintiff filed a motion to strike it [41] as redundant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), citing in support Wilbert Funeral Services, Inc. v. Custom Services Unlimited, LLC, No. 10 CV 3272, 2010 WL 4627663, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 5, 2010) (striking as redundant an affirmative defense tha..
More
ORDER
IAIN D. JOHNSTON, Magistrate Judge.
Defendant filed an affirmative defense consisting solely of a reference to paragraphs one through eighty-six of its counterclaim. Dkt. 32 at 9-10. The plaintiff filed a motion to strike it [41] as redundant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), citing in support Wilbert Funeral Services, Inc. v. Custom Services Unlimited, LLC, No. 10 CV 3272, 2010 WL 4627663, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 5, 2010) (striking as redundant an affirmative defense that merely repeated the counterclaim). The Court afforded the defendant an opportunity to distinguish Wilbert, but instead it filed a response that did not address Wilbert but rather confirmed that its affirmative defense and counterclaim are identical, which was never at issue. Because the affirmative defense is identical to the counterclaim, and because the defendant has not explained why the affirmative defense is not redundant, it is this Court's Report and Recommendation that the motion to strike [41] be granted, that the affirmative defense be stricken, and that leave be granted to file within 14 days of the entry of the district court's order a true affirmative defense. Any objection to this Report and Recommendation must be filed by 5/7/2015. Presentment of the motion to strike [41] set for 4/28/2015 is stricken and no appearance is required on that date.
Source: Leagle
