Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-02272/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-02272-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jermaine Jordan, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Charles L. Ryan, et al., 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-11-2272-PHX-ROS (LOA)

ORDER

This matter arises before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Motion

of Reply to Defendants’ Answer, doc. 43. (Doc. 44)

I. Background

Plaintiff filed a pro se Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint on November 18, 2011,

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc.1) Plaintiff alleged only one claim for relief, i.e., that his

Eighth Amendment rights were violated when Defendants failed to protect him from being

raped by another inmate. (Doc. 8 at 3) After the mandatory screening process pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), the Court ordered that Defendants Morgan and Moore answer the

complaint. (Id. at 3) The Court dismissed the remaining defendants. (Id.) Defendants

Morgan and Moore answered the complaint on August 29, 2012. (Doc. 42) On September

5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a document entitled Motion to Reply to Defendants Answer. (Doc.

43) It is that document that Defendants wish to have the Court strike. 

///

Case 2:11-cv-02272-ROS Document 45 Filed 09/27/12 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 -

II. Analysis

Defendants moved to strike Plaintiff’s Reply on the ground that a reply to an answer

is not permitted under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, unless the Court orders that one

be filed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a)(7). The rule sets forth the only pleadings that are allowed.

Subsection (7) specifically states that a reply to an answer is only permitted if the court

orders one. (Id.) 

Plaintiff does not allege, nor does the docket reflect, that the Court ordered a reply to

Defendants’ answer. Therefore, under Rule 7(a)(7) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,

it is an impermissible pleading and the Court will strike it from the record. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Motion of Reply to

Defendants’ Answer, doc. 44, is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is kindly directed to strike

doc. 43 from the record.

Dated this 27th day of September, 2012. 

Case 2:11-cv-02272-ROS Document 45 Filed 09/27/12 Page 2 of 2