Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05125/USCOURTS-caed-1_03-cv-05125-10/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHN R. MARTINEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

W. SHAW, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 03 5125 OWW SMS P 

ORDER CONSTRUING “SUPPLEMENTAL

MEMORANDUM . . .” AS SURREPLY (Doc.

79) 

ORDER STRIKING SURREPLY FROM

RECORD (Doc. 79.) 

John R. Martinez (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On November 18, 2005, the remaining Defendants, Cobbs, Berkeler, Shaw, Ybarra,

Rodriguez and Lopez filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. An Amended Motion for

Summary Adjudication was filed by Defendants on November 22, 2005, and is currently pending

before the Court. Plaintiff filed his Opposition to the Motion on May 22, 2006. Defendants filed

a Reply to the Opposition on June 21, 2006. Plaintiff then filed a pleading titled “Supplemental

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in support of Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendant’s

Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.” In this pleading, Plaintiff addresses Defendant’s Reply

to the Opposition. 

The Court CONSTRUES Plaintiff’s pleading as a Surreply. However, the Local Rules

provide for a motion, an opposition, and a reply. Local Rule 78-230(c), (d). Neither the Local

Rules nor the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide the right to file a surreply, and the Court

Case 1:03-cv-05125-OWW -SMS Document 80 Filed 08/23/06 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

neither requested one from Plaintiff or granted him permission to file one. See, Rule 56,

Fed.R.Civ.P. 

Accordingly, in light of the above, the Court HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. The pleading titled “Supplemental Memorandum . . .” that addresses Defendant’s

Reply to the Opposition is CONSTRUED as a SURREPLY; and

2. The SURREPLY is STRICKEN from the record as unauthorized. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 22, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:03-cv-05125-OWW -SMS Document 80 Filed 08/23/06 Page 2 of 2