From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gonzalez v. Monterey Fin. Servs.

United States District Court, Southern District of California
Aug 29, 2024
23cv2368-BEN-DEB (S.D. Cal. Aug. 29, 2024)

Opinion

23cv2368-BEN-DEB

08-29-2024

LARIZA GONZALEZ, individually and on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. MONTEREY FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, Defendant.


ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STRIKE

HON. ROGER T. BENITEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Strike. Defendant filed an opposition. After considering the papers submitted, Plaintiff's Motion to Strike is denied.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) allows a court to strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter. The purpose of a Rule 12(f) motion “is to avoid the expenditure of time and money that must arise from litigating spurious issues by dispensing with those issues prior to trial.” Whittlestone, Inc. v. Handi-Craft Co., 618 F.3d 970, 973 (9th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks omitted). “Motions to strike are generally disfavored and should not be granted unless the matter to be stricken clearly could have no possible bearing on the subject of the litigation.” Diamond S.J. Enter., Inc. v. City of San Jose, 395 F.Supp.3d 1202, 1216 (N.D. Cal. 2019) (internal quotations omitted). The decision to grant a motion to strike ultimately lies within the discretion of the trial court. Rees v. PNC Bank, N.A., 308 F.R.D. 266, 271-72 (N.D. Cal. 2015) (citing Whittlestone, 618 F.3d at 973).

Here, Plaintiff moves to strike a so-called Rule 68 offer that has not been filed on the docket. Consequently, at this point “there is nothing to strike.” Bogner v. Masari Invs., LLC, 2009 WL 1395398, at *1 (D. Ariz. May 19, 2009) (“Because Defendants have not filed the offer of judgment with the Court, there is nothing to strike from the record.”); Parker v. Risk Mgmt. Alternative, Inc., 204 F.R.D. 113, 114 (N.D. Ill. 2001) (“Plaintiff has erred by moving to strike a document that has not been filed with the court.”).

CONCLUSION

For the above reasons, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion to Strike.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Gonzalez v. Monterey Fin. Servs.

United States District Court, Southern District of California
Aug 29, 2024
23cv2368-BEN-DEB (S.D. Cal. Aug. 29, 2024)
Case details for

Gonzalez v. Monterey Fin. Servs.

Case Details

Full title:LARIZA GONZALEZ, individually and on behalf of herself and all others…

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of California

Date published: Aug 29, 2024

Citations

23cv2368-BEN-DEB (S.D. Cal. Aug. 29, 2024)