Opinion
23-10407
06-02-2023
Bernadette Scott, Plaintiff, v. SCFR-HW-V, LLC, Defendant.
CURTIS IVY, JR. MAG. JUDGE
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT [11, 12]
JUDITH E. LEVY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's response to the Court's second order to show cause (ECF No. 11) and Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the complaint. (ECF No. 12.) The Court strikes those documents for the following reason(s):
[] Missing statement of concurrence or the statement of concurrence does not comply with Local Rule 7.1(a). See E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(a).
[X] Wrong font size or improper formatting (e.g., single-spaced, improper margins, no page numbers, etc.). See E.D. Mich. LR 5.1(a)(2)-(3).
[] Over-length. See E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(d)(3).
[] Brief missing required information (e.g., concise statement of issues, controlling or most appropriate authority). See E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(d)(2).
[] Exhibits do not comply with Rule 19(b) of the Electronic Filing Policies and Procedures (e.g., index, separate attachment for each exhibit). See E.D. Mich. LR 5.1(d)(1), 5.1.1(a).
[] Contains information that must be redacted (e.g., social security number, taxpayer identification number, birth date, minor's name, financial account number). See Fed.R.Civ.P. 5.2.
[] Non-compliance with Local Rule 5.3 regarding filing an item under seal in a civil case. See E.D. Mich. LR 5.3.
[X] Other: Plaintiffs June 1, 2023 response appears to be identical to her April 10, 2023 response. (Compare ECF No. 6 with ECF No. 11.)
The documents (ECF Nos. 11, 12) are STRICKEN and not part of the record. The documents must be refiled in full compliance with the applicable rule(s) by Tuesday, June 6, 2023.
IT IS SO ORDERED.