Opinion
23-cv-04597-EMC
08-22-2024
ASHLEY M GJOVIK, Plaintiff, v. APPLE INC., Defendant.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY Docket Nos. 93-96
EDWARD M. CHEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a sur-reply is DENIED. The brief is not targeted to any alleged new contention in Defendant's reply. Furthermore, the proposed sur-reply is more than seventy pages in length, exceeding the page lengths permitted for motions, oppositions, and reply briefs.
The Court therefore STRIKES the sur-reply and the documents submitted in support. The declaration is also improper as the motion pending before the Court is a 12(b)(6) motion and not, e.g., a summary judgment motion.
Finally, to the extent Plaintiff has asked the Court to consider additional case authorities, see Docket No. 96, the Court reserves ruling as to whether it shall do so.
IT IS SO ORDERED.