Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00793/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00793-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Catrell Bakari
Plaintiff
Gordon Trucking, Inc
Defendant

Document Text:

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

CATRELL BAKARI,

Plaintiff,

v.

GORDON TRUCKING, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 1:16-cv-00793-DAD-SAB

ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S 

RESPONSE TO AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

(ECF No. 4)

Plaintiff Catrell Bakari, proceeding pro se, filed this action in Fresno County Superior 

Court on March 16, 2016. On June 6, 2016, Defendant Gordon Trucking, Inc. filed an answer. 

On June 7, 2016, Defendant removed the action to the Eastern District of California. On July 12, 

2016, Plaintiff filed a response to Defendant’s answer to the complaint. 

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide, in relevant part, that there shall be a 

complaint, an answer, and a reply to an answer if the court orders one. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a). The 

Court has not ordered a reply to the answer and declines to make such an order. Therefore,

Plaintiff’s response to Defendant Gordon Trucking Inc.’s affirmative defense shall be stricken 

from the record. 

Additionally, included with the response is a request for production of documents and 

request for interrogatories. Plaintiff is directed to Rule 26(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure which states that a”[a] party may not seek discovery from any source before the 

Case 1:16-cv-00793-DAD-SAB Document 5 Filed 07/14/16 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

parties have conferred as required by Rule 26(f).” Plaintiff is advised that even though he is 

proceeding pro se in this action, he is required to familiarize himself with and comply with the 

Federal Rules and Local Rules that apply in this action. 

Finally, Plaintiff is advised that the Court is not a repository for the parties’ evidence. 

Discovery requests and response are not to be filed in the action unless they are relevant to a 

matter that is pending decision. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s response, filed July 12, 2016, is 

STRICKEN from the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 14, 2016 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00793-DAD-SAB Document 5 Filed 07/14/16 Page 2 of 2