ORDER

STEVEN D. MERRYDAY, District Judge.

The plaintiff moves (Doc. 25) to strike "certain affirmative" defenses and to "treat other affirmative defenses as specific denials." Under Rule 12(f), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, "[t]he court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter."

The plaintiffs argue that several defenses are insufficient because the defenses include little or no factual or legal support. But "numerous judicial decisions make it clear that motions under Rule 12(f) are viewed with disfavor ... and are infrequently granted." Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, Vol. 5C, § 1380 (3d ed. 2013). "[E]ven when technically appropriate and well-founded, Rule 12(f) motions often are not granted in the absence of a showing of prejudice to the moving party." Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, Vol 5C, § 1381 (3d ed. 2013). "[A]n affirmative defense may be pleaded in general terms and will be held to be sufficient, and therefore invulnerable to a motion to strike, as long as it gives the plaintiff fair notice of the nature of the defense." Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, Vol. 5, § 1274 (3d ed. 2013).

Because none of the affirmative defenses prejudices the plaintiffs, and each defense, at least, places the plaintiffs on notice of the nature of that defense, the motion (Doc. 25) to strike is DENIED. To the extent that an affirmative defense is a specific denial, "the Court will not strike the ... [a]ffirmative [d]efense but treat it as a denial." Muschong v. Millennium Physician Grp., LLC, 2014 WL 3341142, at *2 (M.D. Fla. July 8, 2014) (Chappell, J.); accord Goodbys Creek, LLC v. Arch Insurance Co., 2009 WL 1139572, at *3 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 27, 2009) (Snyder, J.).