Opinion
2:23-cv-948-JES-KCD
07-23-2024
KATHLEEN HERMAN, Plaintiffs, v. THE MR. COOPER GROUP INC., Defendant.
ORDER
Kyle C. Dudek, United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff has filed a document titled “Clarification & Motion to Strike.” (Doc. 90.) The motion (to the extent it can be called that) is incomprehensible. After listing a series of docket entries, Plaintiff demands that several be stricken. But there is no discussion of the legal standard the Court should apply, nor any reasoned argument. Indeed, the Court cannot even discern what exactly Plaintiff is seeking to strike. Accordingly, Doc. 90 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Any future motions must comply with Local Rule 3.01, which requires “a concise statement of the precise relief requested, a statement of the basis for the request, and a legal memorandum supporting the request.”
SO ORDERED.