Opinion
6:23-cv-659-CEM-LHP
05-26-2023
KHALED ABDEL-FATTAH, Plaintiff, v. FATIMA BELAL and MOHAMED Z. DELHOUM, Defendants
ORDER
LESLIE HOFFMAN PRICE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed herein:
MOTION: MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANTS' ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES (Doc. No. 13)
FILED: May 24, 2023
THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is DENIED without prejudice.
Plaintiff, appearing pro se, has filed a motion to strike pro se Defendants' answer and affirmative defenses. Doc. No. 13. Upon review, the motion will be denied without prejudice for two reasons. First, the motion fails to comply with the Local Rules, including Local Rules 3.01(a) and 3.01(g). Second, in substance, rather than setting forth bases for striking defenses, the motion appears to be a response and/or reply to Defendants' answer and affirmative defenses, which is not authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, absent leave of Court. Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(a)(7).
DONE and ORDERED.