Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-00869/USCOURTS-cand-3_03-cv-00869-19/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES H. WASHBURN JR.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SAN FRANCISCO POLICE OFFICERS ALEX

FAGAN, JR. AND WALTER CONTRERAS, et

al.,

Defendants. /

No. C-03-00869 MJJ (EDL)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO STRIKE

On August 23, 2006, Plaintiff filed a motion to strike Defendants’ Reply to Opposition to

Bill of Costs, which was referred to this Court for resolution. On September 19, 2006, Defendants

filed an opposition to Plaintiff’s motion to strike. Because this matter is appropriate for decision

without oral argument, the October 10, 2006 hearing is vacated. 

Following entry of judgment, Defendants filed a bill of costs on July 28, 2006 and a

corrected bill of costs on August 1, 2006. Civil L.R. 54-1. As permitted by the Local Rules,

Plaintiff filed an opposition to the bill of costs. Civil L.R. 54-2. The Local Rules do not provide for

the filing of a reply, but Defendants did so on August 18, 2006. Because Defendants filed the reply

without leave of court or a request by the clerk for further documentation (Civil L.R. 54-4(a)),

Plaintiff’s motion to strike the reply brief is granted. 

To the extent that Plaintiff’s motion to strike seeks to correct alleged misstatements

contained in Defendants’ reply brief, it is moot. To the extent that Plaintiff’s motion to strike seeks

any other relief, it is denied. Defendants’ purported motion to strike alleged improper argument in

Plaintiff’s opposition to the bill of costs is denied for failure to file a separate motion pursuant to

Case 3:03-cv-00869-MJJ Document 372 Filed 10/04/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Civil Local Rule 7-1. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 4, 2006 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:03-cv-00869-MJJ Document 372 Filed 10/04/06 Page 2 of 2