Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02096/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02096-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Arizona Nutritional Supplements, Inc., an

Arizona corporation,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Protient, Inc., a Delaware corporation; et

al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-05-2096-PHX-LOA

ORDER

Upon review of Defendant’s timely-filed Reply and Supplemental Statement of

Facts, the Court concludes that Defendant’s font size for these documents is less than the

minimum 13 point required by the District Court’s Local Rules (LRCiv 7.1(b)) and is

obviously smaller than the font size used in Defendant’s pending Motion for Summary

Judgement or Alternatively, Motion to Preclude Expert Testimony. This is not a picayune

requirement or violation as the Court and adverse counsel should not be forced to strain to

read Defendant’s documents and all parties should abide by the same rules and page

limitations. 

Rather than not considering Defendant’s timely-filed Reply and Supplemental

Statement of Facts in the Court’s decisional process which is overly harsh for what may be

an innocent clerical error, the Court will strike these documents and will grant Defendant

Case 2:05-cv-02096-LOA Document 87 Filed 06/13/07 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 -

limited leave to timely refile the documents by a certain deadline provided the newly-filed

documents comply in all aspects with the Local Rules.

On the Court’s own motion,

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Reply and Supplemental Statement of Facts

(docket # 85 and # 86) are hereby STRICKEN from the record of this case. Defendant may

refile these documents no later than Monday, June 18, 2007 without substantive changes.

Failure to timely refile these documents, which shall comply in all aspects with the Local

Rules, may result in the Court’s ruling on the pending Motion without consideration of

Defendant’s Reply and Supplemental Statement of Facts.

Chambers shall fax a copy of this Order to counsel of record.

DATED this 13th day of June, 2007.

Case 2:05-cv-02096-LOA Document 87 Filed 06/13/07 Page 2 of 2