Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02038/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02038-7/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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES HAMPTON,

Plaintiff,

v.

R. HAYNIE, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:14-cv-2038 TLN KJN P

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel. Defendants’ motion for summary 

judgment is presently pending. However, plaintiff failed to sign his opposition. (ECF No. 33.) 

Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states:

Every pleading, written motion, and other paper must be signed by 

at least one attorney of record in the attorney’s name -- or by a 

party personally if the party is unrepresented. The paper must state 

the signer's address, e-mail address, and telephone number. Unless 

a rule or statute specifically states otherwise, a pleading need not be 

verified or accompanied by an affidavit. The court must strike an 

unsigned paper unless the omission is promptly corrected after 

being called to the attorney's or party's attention.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. Because plaintiff failed to sign the opposition, the court will provide plaintiff 

an opportunity to file a signed opposition. 

Moreover, after defendants filed their reply, plaintiff filed a document entitled “Motion in 

Response to Defendants’ Reply.” (ECF No. 35.) Such filing is a surreply. The Local Rules do 

Case 2:14-cv-02038-TLN-KJN Document 41 Filed 12/04/15 Page 1 of 3
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

not authorize the routine filing of a surreply. Nevertheless, a district court may allow a surreply 

“where a valid reason for such additional briefing exists, such as where the movant raises new 

arguments in its reply brief.” Hill v. England, 2005 WL 3031136, at *1 (E.D. Cal. 2005); accord

Norwood v. Byers, 2013 WL 3330643, at *3 (E.D. Cal. 2013) (granting the motion to strike the 

surreply because “defendants did not raise new arguments in their reply that necessitated 

additional argument from plaintiff, plaintiff did not seek leave to file a surreply before actually 

filing it, and the arguments in the surreply do not alter the analysis below”), adopted, 2013 WL 

5156572 (E.D. Cal. 2013). In the present case, defendants did not raise new arguments in their 

reply, and plaintiff did not seek leave to file a surreply. Plaintiff’s surreply is stricken.

Finally, plaintiff filed a document entitled “Motion to bring Charges of Perjury Against 

Witness.” (ECF No. 36.) It appears that plaintiff believes that the appeals coordinator either lied 

or “falsified a legal document to protect the same co-workers.” (ECF No. 36 at 2.) Plaintiff is 

advised that his request for this court to bring “charges of perjury” is inappropriate. Rather, if 

plaintiff has evidence to rebut the declaration of the appeals coordinator, or to refute the 

documentary evidence at issue in the pending motion, plaintiff must submit such evidence for 

consideration by the court with his opposition. 

In addition, in the declaration appended to this motion, plaintiff included a statement that 

he “declares that all statements made in this case have been made under penalty of perjury.” 

(ECF No. 36 at 3.) Plaintiff is advised that such a broad and global statement is not proper and is

ineffective because it deprives defendants of an opportunity to address such statements in the 

context in which such statements are made. 

Moreover, plaintiff appended exhibits to the motion alleging perjury, and included 

arguments concerning the pending motion for summary judgment. Local Rule 230 contemplates 

the filing of a motion, an opposition, and a reply. Id. Plaintiff is advised that all of his arguments 

in opposition to the motion for summary judgment must be contained in one opposition, and all 

evidence in support thereof must be provided with the opposition. However, plaintiff may refer 

to the exhibits appended to his original complaint (ECF No. 1 at 6-23), because such documents 

remain a part of the court record for use by any party.

Case 2:14-cv-02038-TLN-KJN Document 41 Filed 12/04/15 Page 2 of 3
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

3

In light of the above, plaintiff is granted an opportunity to correct the above deficiencies. 

Plaintiff may choose to (1) re-submit his prior opposition bearing his signature, or, (2) file a 

signed amended opposition that includes all of his arguments and evidence in opposition to the 

motion. If plaintiff resubmits his first opposition with his signature, no further briefing is 

required, and the motion will stand submitted. If plaintiff chooses the second option, plaintiff 

shall entitle his filing “Amended Opposition,” and defendants shall file an amended reply within 

seven days. Once the amended reply is filed, no further filing by any party is permitted. No 

surreply is authorized. 

No extensions of time will be granted.1Plaintiff is cautioned that if he fails to timely 

respond to this order, the undersigned is required to strike his unsigned opposition, and consider 

defendants’ motion as unopposed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s surreply (ECF No. 35) is stricken from the court record.

2. Plaintiff’s motion to bring perjury charges (ECF No. 36) is denied.

3. On or before January 4, 2016, plaintiff shall either (1) re-submit his prior opposition 

bearing his signature, or (2) file a signed amended opposition that includes all of his arguments 

and evidence in opposition to the motion.

4. If plaintiff files an “Amended Opposition,” defendants shall file an amended reply 

within seven days. No other briefing is permitted.

5. The Clerk of the Court shall send plaintiff a copy of his opposition with the filing 

banner removed. (ECF No. 33.) 

Dated: December 4, 2015

/hamp2038.fb

 

1

 Plaintiff is cautioned that the court is imposing a January 4, 2016 filing deadline. This means 

that plaintiff must prepare his filing and submit it to prison officials for mailing with sufficient 

time to ensure it is filed on or before January 4, 2016. Plaintiff is well aware of his arguments in 

opposition to the pending motion, and the issues are limited to the exhaustion of administrative 

remedies. The merits of plaintiff’s underlying claims against defendants are not at issue at this 

time.

Case 2:14-cv-02038-TLN-KJN Document 41 Filed 12/04/15 Page 3 of 3