Opinion
Case No. 2:12-cv-00074-APG-GWF
10-27-2014
CYBERGUN S.A., a French Corporation, and FN HERSTAL, S.A., a Belgian Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. JAG PRECISION, a California Corporation, Defendant.
Order Denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike
[Dkt. #124]
Plaintiffs Cybergun and FN Herstal (collectively, "Cybergun") have moved under Rule 12(f) to strike certain defenses and counterclaims in defendant Jag Precision's Answer to the Amended Complaint and Counterclaims.
(Dkt. #37.)
Cybergun's Motion is untimely. A party may move to strike "either before responding to the pleading or, if a response is not allowed, within 21 days after being served with the pleading." Jag's Answer was filed on March, 2, 2012 and Cybergun's response was filed on March 23, 2012. Cybergun moved to strike Jag's Answer on February 20, 2014. Because Cybergun delayed for nearly two years before moving to strike, I deny its motion.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f)(2); Jaden Inv. Trust v. Bank of Am., N.A, 2:13-CV-02063-MMD, 2014 WL 293308 (D. Nev. Jan. 23, 2014); Halifax Paving, Inc. v. U.S. Fire Ins. Co., 2006 WL 3708090, *1 (D. Fla. 2006) (denying motion to strike, in part, because of six month delay in filing).
(Dkt. #37.)
(Dkt. #41.)
(Dkt. #124.)
--------
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike is DENIED.
DATED this 27th day of October, 2014.
/s/_________
ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE