Klahn v. Seitz, 1:16-cv-00342-DAD-JLT (PC). (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20181109i33
Visitors: 9
Filed: Nov. 07, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 07, 2018
Summary: ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S ANSWER (Doc. 31) JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . Defendant filed an Answer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint on October 17, 2018. (Doc. 27.) On November 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed a response to Defendant's Answer. (Doc. 31.) Plaintiff does not have a right to file a response/surreply to Defendant's Answer under the Local Rules or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Therefore, Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Answer, filed
Summary: ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S ANSWER (Doc. 31) JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . Defendant filed an Answer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint on October 17, 2018. (Doc. 27.) On November 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed a response to Defendant's Answer. (Doc. 31.) Plaintiff does not have a right to file a response/surreply to Defendant's Answer under the Local Rules or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Therefore, Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Answer, filed ..
More
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S ANSWER
(Doc. 31)
JENNIFER L. THURSTON, Magistrate Judge.
Defendant filed an Answer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint on October 17, 2018. (Doc. 27.) On November 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed a response to Defendant's Answer. (Doc. 31.) Plaintiff does not have a right to file a response/surreply to Defendant's Answer under the Local Rules or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Therefore, Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Answer, filed on November 2, 2018 (Doc. 31), is STRICKEN from the record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
