Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00594/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00594-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 870
Nature of Suit: Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 28:2201 Injunction

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. )

)

STEVEN HEMPFLING, d/b/a/ FREE )

ENTERPRISE SOCIETY, )

)

Defendant. )

)

 )

1:05-cv-00594-LJO-SMS

ORDER STRIKING DEFENDANT’S

OBJECTIONS (DOCS. 120, 121) 

Plaintiff is proceeding with a civil action in this Court.

The matter has been referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rules 72-302(c)(1) and 72-303.

Pending before the Court are objections filed by Defendant Steven

Hempfling on February 11, 2008.

On January 30, 2008, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to

compel responses to interrogatories and requests for production.

On February 11, 2008, Defendant purported to file objections to

the Magistrate Judge’s order granting Plaintiff’s motion. (Docs.

120, 121.) However, the Magistrate Judge did not file findings

and recommendations with respect to Plaintiff’s discovery motion;

rather, the Court ruled outright on the motion. Pursuant to the

pertinent Local Rules for the United States District Court,

Case 1:05-cv-00594-LJO -SMS Document 127 Filed 02/13/08 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Eastern District of California, objections to a Magistrate

Judge’s findings and recommendations are permitted; however,

there is no provision for objections to be filed to the

dispositive order of a Magistrate Judge, and a Magistrate Judge’s

order is final absent a request for reconsideration. Local Rules

72-304, 72-303.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) provides as follows:

Upon motion made by a party before responding to

a pleading or, if no responsive pleading is permitted

by these rules, upon motion made by a party within 20

days after the service of the pleading upon the party

or upon the court’s own initiative at any time, the

court may order stricken from any pleading any

insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial,

impertinent, or scandalous matter.

A court may strike a document that does not conform to the formal

requirements of the pertinent rules of court. Transamerican Corp.

v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 143 F.R.D.

189, 191 (N.D. Ill. 1992).

Accordingly, it IS ORDERED that Defendant’s objections,

filed on February 11, 2008, BE STRICKEN from the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 12, 2008 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00594-LJO -SMS Document 127 Filed 02/13/08 Page 2 of 2