Opinion
Case No. 05-C-1072.
April 16, 2007
ORDER
The defendant's reply brief (Docket No. 117) has sparked a flurry of filings on account of the fact that it was seven pages over the fifteen permitted under Civil L.R. 7.1(f). In the interest of quickly resolving this matter, the court shall not take the time to summarize all of the various filings submitted by the parties relating to this matter. The court grants plaintiff's motion to strike (Docket No. 127) in part. It will strike the defendant's reply. As for the rebuttal expert report, the court denies the plaintiff's motion to strike, in part (Docket No. 127). The court will simply not consider the report if it is not being used for rebuttal purposes, as previously ordered. The court denies defendant's motion for leave to file excess pages, however grants the defendant's motion to file an amended reply brief. (Docket No. 129). The court accepts the defendant's proposed amended reply brief, (Docket No. 135), as its reply brief in support of the defendant's motion for summary judgment. Although the defendant's amended brief still fails to comply with Civil L.R. 7.1(f) in that it consists of sixteen
pages when the heading is counted, as Civil L.R. 7.1(f) says it must be, the court shall nonetheless accept this oversized filing.
SO ORDERED.