MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CHARLES A. SHAW, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Sally K. Favaloro's motion to strike defendants' memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. The motion will be denied for the following reasons.

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), a court may "strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." Rule 12(f), Fed. R. Civ. P. (emphasis added). A motion to strike is properly directed only to material contained in pleadings. Coleman v. City of Pagedale, No. 4:06-CV-1376 ERW, 2008 WL 161897, *4 (E.D. Mo. Jan.15, 2008). The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure define pleadings as a complaint, an answer to a complaint, an answer to a counterclaim designated as a counterclaim, an answer to a crossclaim, a third-party complaint, an answer to a third-party complaint, and if the court orders one, a reply to an answer. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a). Motions, briefs, memoranda, objections or affidavits may not be attacked by a motion to strike. 2 James W. Moore, et al., Moore's Federal Practice § 12.37[2] (3rd ed.2010). See Coleman, 2008 WL 161897, at *4; Mecklenburg Farm, Inc. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., No. 4:07-CV-1719 CAS, 2008 WL 2518561, *1 (E.D. Mo. June 19, 2008). Defendants' memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is not a pleading and thus cannot be attacked with a motion to strike.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to strike defendants' memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is DENIED. [Doc. 49]