Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01814/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01814-45/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On January 29, 2016, Defendant Goss filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings of 

Plaintiff’s due process claim against him. (Doc. 162.) Plaintiff filed an opposition on February 10, 

2016 to which Defendant Goss replied on February 16, 2016. (Docs. 164, 166.) Defendant’s motion 

for judgment on the pleadings was deemed submitted pursuant to Local Rule 230(l) on February 16, 

2016. However, on March 16, 2016, Plaintiff filed a “supplemental argument in opposition” to 

Defendant’s motion. Plaintiff does not have a right to file any such supplemental argument under the 

Local Rules or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Plaintiff did not obtain leave of court to do 

so. 

///

///

///

///

LAWRENCE CHRISTOPHER SMITH,

 Plaintiff,

v.

D. GOSS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 1:10-cv-01814-LJO-JLT (PC) 

ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S 

SUPPLEMENTAL ARGUMENT IN 

OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT GOSS’ 

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE 

PLEADINGS 

(Doc. 179)

Case 1:10-cv-01814-DAD-JLT Document 181 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 2
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

Therefore, Plaintiff=s supplemental argument in opposition to Defendant Goss’ motion for 

judgment on the pleadings, filed on March 16, 2016, is ORDERED STRICKEN from the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 17, 2016 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-01814-DAD-JLT Document 181 Filed 03/18/16 Page 2 of 2