Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-03421/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-03421-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 15:1126 Patent Infringement

---

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

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CRAIGSLIST, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

EVERYMD.COM LLC,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-03421-EMC 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION TO STRIKE

Docket No. 25

Plaintiff has filed an action for a declaratory judgment of patent noninfringement and 

invalidity. In response to the operative first amended complaint, Defendant included as its second 

affirmative defense an alleged violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. See Ans. ¶ 45 et 

seq. Plaintiff has moved to strike this affirmative defense on the ground that a Rule 11 violation is 

not properly raised (i.e., procedurally) as an affirmative defense. Defendant has filed a statement 

of nonopposition to Plaintiff’s motion, although noting, inter alia, that striking the affirmative 

defense would “not have any effect on [its] right to seek sanctions [pursuant to] Rule 11.” Not. at 

3-4. 

In light of Defendant’s statement of nonopposition, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion 

to strike. Further, the hearing on Plaintiff’s motion to strike is hereby VACATED. This order 

does not address the substantive merits of whether or not Plaintiff violated Rule 11. 

This order disposes of Docket No. 25.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 23, 2016

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:16-cv-03421-EMC Document 28 Filed 08/23/16 Page 1 of 1