Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01214/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01214-23/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

THOMAS K. MILLS,

Plaintiff,

v.

ZACHERY JONES, et al.

Defendants.

No. 1:23-cv-01214-JLT-SAB (PC)

ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S REPLY 

TO ANSWER

(ECF No. 65)

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this action filed pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. 

On June 4, 2024, Plaintiff filed a reply to Defendants’ filed which was filed on March 11, 

2024.

Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides as follows: 

There shall be a complaint and an answer; a reply to a counterclaim denominated as such; 

an answer to a cross-claim, if the answer contains a cross-claim; a third-party complaint, if 

a person who was not an original party is summoned under the provisions of Rule 14; and 

a third-party answer, if a third-party complaint is served. No other pleading shall be 

allowed, except that the court may order a reply to an answer or a third-party answer. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a). 

Here, the Court did not order Plaintiff to reply to Defendants’ answer, nor did Plaintiff 

seek any leave to file a reply to the answer. The Court declines to require any reply to the answer.

Case 1:23-cv-01214-JLT-SAB Document 67 Filed 06/05/24 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

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s reply to Defendants’ answer, filed on June 4, 2024, is stricken 

from the record. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 5, 2024 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:23-cv-01214-JLT-SAB Document 67 Filed 06/05/24 Page 2 of 2