Opinion
No. 4:14-CV-284 CAS
03-04-2015
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff Sally K. Favaloro's motion to strike defendants' memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. The motion will be denied for the following reasons.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), a court may "strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." Rule 12(f), Fed. R. Civ. P. (emphasis added). A motion to strike is properly directed only to material contained in pleadings. Coleman v. City of Pagedale, No. 4:06-CV-1376 ERW, 2008 WL 161897, *4 (E.D. Mo. Jan.15, 2008). The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure define pleadings as a complaint, an answer to a complaint, an answer to a counterclaim designated as a counterclaim, an answer to a crossclaim, a third-party complaint, an answer to a third-party complaint, and if the court orders one, a reply to an answer. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a). Motions, briefs, memoranda, objections or affidavits may not be attacked by a motion to strike. 2 James W. Moore, et al., Moore's Federal Practice § 12.37[2] (3rd ed.2010). See Coleman, 2008 WL 161897, at *4; Mecklenburg Farm, Inc. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., No. 4:07-CV-1719 CAS, 2008 WL 2518561, *1 (E.D. Mo. June 19, 2008). Defendants' memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is not a pleading and thus cannot be attacked with a motion to strike.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to strike defendants' memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is DENIED. [Doc. 49]
/s/ _________
CHARLES A. SHAW
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 4th day of March, 2015.