Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00835/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00835-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
ACA Receivables, LLC
Defendant
David Aswad
Plaintiff
Rachel Aswad
Plaintiff
Franklin J. Love
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RACHEL ASWAD and DAVID ASWAD,)

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

vs. )

)

)

ACA RECEIVABLES, LLC; )

FRANKLIN J. LOVE, an individual; )

and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, )

)

Defendants. )

)

)

___________________________________ )

1:06-cv-00835-AWI LJO

ORDER DENYING

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO

STRIKE AS MOOT

[Doc. 11]

This is a civil action in which Attorney Franklin J. Love is a defendant. On August

10, 2006, Plaintiffs filed a motion to strike eight affirmative defenses in Defendant Love’s

answer. This motion was filed electronically, and was not accompanied by proof of service

on Defendant Love. On January 11, 2007, this court entered an order requiring in part that 

Plaintiffs serve Defendant Love with a copy of their motion to strike no later than January 12,

2007, and Defendant Love file and serve any opposition to the motion to strike no later than

January 26, 2007.

Case 1:06-cv-00835-AWI-LJO Document 31 Filed 02/14/07 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

Defendant Love did not file an opposition to the motion to strike. Rather, on January

24, 2007, he filed a first amended answer. Plaintiffs have not indicated any opposition to the

filing of the first amended answer. Accordingly, the court HEREBY CONSTRUES

Defendant Love’s first amended answer as a statement of non-opposition to the motion to

strike under Local Rule 78-230(c). The court further HEREBY GRANTS Defendant Love

leave to file an amended answer pursuant to Rule 15(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

Finally, in light of the filing of the first amended answer, the court HEREBY DENIES

Plaintiffs’ motion to strike the original answer as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 12, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00835-AWI-LJO Document 31 Filed 02/14/07 Page 2 of 2