ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS' RESPONSES TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

[ECF Nos. 155, 156]

GONZALO P. CURIEL, District Judge.

Defendants Robert Rosette, Rosette & Associates, PC, Rosette, LLP, and Richard Armstrong filed a Motion to Strike Plaintiffs' Sixth Claim for Relief and a separate Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Claims for Relief and to Strike Portions of the Second Amended Complaint. ECF Nos. 109, 110. Both Motions were noticed for the same hearing day, October 12, 2018. Defendants Quechan Tribe, Keeny Escalanti, and Mark White also filed a Motion to Dismiss. ECF No. 115.

On September 7, 2018, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause Regarding Defendants' Noncompliance with Local Rule 7.1(h). Defendants have promptly responded to the Court's Order. Local Rule 7.1(h) provides that briefs or memoranda in support of or in opposition to all motions noticed for the same motion day must not exceed 25 pages in length, per party, absent leave of the Court. As the Rosette Defendants note, the Local Rules do not appear to speak on the matter, but courts within this district calculate page lengths by excluding caption pages and tables. See, e.g., Freas v. BMW of N. Am., LLC, No. 3:17-cv-01761-H-AGS, 2017 WL 6345393, at *3 (S.D. Cal. Dec. 12, 2017). Accordingly, the Quechan Defendants' Memorandum in support of their Motion to Dismiss complies with Local Rule 7.1(h). See ECF No. 115-1.

The Rosette Defendants are not in compliance. These Defendants have filed 25-page and 23-page briefs, excluding caption pages and tables, in support of motions noticed for the same day. ECF Nos. 109-1, 110-1. The Rosette Defendants retroactively request leave to exceed the page limit for their presently filed motions. ECF No. 155 at 3. The Rosette Defendants note that Local Rule 7.1(h) limits memoranda to 25 pages "per party," and that the Rosette Defendants comprise four parties. Id. But the Rosette Defendants have not explained if or how their memoranda addresses arguments unique to any of the Defendants, rather than just argumentation applicable to all Rosette Defendants, such that leave to exceed the page limit would be warranted.

However, given that Plaintiffs have filed their oppositions to the Rosette Defendants, the Court will allow Rosette Defendants excessive briefs in this instance. The Rosette Defendants "note that the parties appear to have fallen into this approach [of non-compliance] throughout the case." ECF No. 155 at 3. Nevertheless, the Court is optimistic that, going forward, such practice will end. All parties are forewarned that they must comply with the brief length provided by the Local Rules or seek leave of the Court before filing an excessive brief. Failure to do so may result in the Court summarily denying the motion without further notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.