Filed: Jan. 12, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 12, 2016
Summary: ORDER NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is a letter that Plaintiff filed on the docket as an ex parte motion, despite the fact that Plaintiff states in the letter that it will be served on all parties via CM/ECF. Docket No. 117. This document contains numerous deficiencies. As an initial matter, the Court addresses the term " ex parte. " The parties in this case have filed numerous documents, that they have served on each other, on the docket as ex parte doc
Summary: ORDER NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . Pending before the Court is a letter that Plaintiff filed on the docket as an ex parte motion, despite the fact that Plaintiff states in the letter that it will be served on all parties via CM/ECF. Docket No. 117. This document contains numerous deficiencies. As an initial matter, the Court addresses the term " ex parte. " The parties in this case have filed numerous documents, that they have served on each other, on the docket as ex parte docu..
More
ORDER
NANCY J. KOPPE, Magistrate Judge.
Pending before the Court is a letter that Plaintiff filed on the docket as an ex parte motion, despite the fact that Plaintiff states in the letter that it will be served on all parties via CM/ECF. Docket No. 117. This document contains numerous deficiencies.
As an initial matter, the Court addresses the term "ex parte." The parties in this case have filed numerous documents, that they have served on each other, on the docket as ex parte documents. See, e.g., Docket Nos. 78, 109, 110, 114. As United States District Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey has succinctly surmised, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." United Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Assurance Co. of Am. & Maryland Casualty Co., 2014 WL 4960915, *1 (D. Nev. June 4, 2014) (quoting Inigo Montoya from The Princess Bride (Act III Communications 1987)). An ex parte document is a document "that is filed with the Court, but is not served upon the opposing or other parties." Local Rule 7-5(a). Further, "all ex parte motions, applications or requests shall contain a statement of good cause why the matter was submitted to the Court without notice to all parties." Local Rule 7-5(b). Finally, "motions, applications or requests may be submitted ex parte only for compelling reasons . . ." Local Rule 7-5(c). The Court has previously denied a motion due to its improper ex parte filing, see Docket No. 79, and expects the parties to comply with all applicable rules regarding practice in this District.
Additionally, the document currently before the Court is a letter requesting a continuance to respond to Defendant's motion for summary judgment. Docket No. 117. A document requesting a Court order, however, must be styled as a motion, not a letter. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 7. Letters to a judge will be disregarded. Further, the Court expects the parties to comply with all Federal and Local Rules regarding the filing of motions. See, e.g., Local Rule 7-2. Therefore, to the extent Plaintiff's letter requests any sort of relief, it is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
