From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Integrative Health Inst. v. Schaffner

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Dec 1, 2021
No. C20-1471-RAJ-MLP (W.D. Wash. Dec. 1, 2021)

Opinion

C20-1471-RAJ-MLP

12-01-2021

INTEGRATIVE HEALTH INSTITUTE PLLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CHRISTINE SCHAFFNER, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

MICHELLE L. PETERSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' “Motion to File an Over-Length Reply Brief in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Discovery” (“Plaintiffs' Motion”). (Dkt. # 103.) Plaintiffs' Motion requests that the Court grant leave to file a single reply brief in support of their pending motion to compel discovery, with ten (10) additional pages authorized, for a total of sixteen (16) pages. (Id. at 1-2.) In the alternative, Plaintiffs request leave to file four separate reply briefs, one for each Defendant in their motion to compel discovery, specifically: (1) Christine Schaffner; (2) Daniel Schaffner; (3) Bella Fiore Klinik, PLLC; and (4) Lumvi Skincare, LLC. (Id.) Plaintiffs argue that leave is warranted due to Plaintiffs' previous withdrawal and re-noting of their motion to compel discovery to comply with the page limit requirements of Local Civil Rule 7(e)(4), the presence of multiple defendants, and the complexity of issues in this case. (Id.)

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(f), motions seeking approval to file an over-length brief are disfavored. Here, Defendants' brief in opposition to Plaintiffs' motion to compel discovery has not yet been filed and is not due until December 13, 2021. Though Defendants' brief has not yet been filed, Defendants' brief in opposition is currently limited to 12 pages. See LCR 7(e)(4). Local Civil Rule 7(f)(4) does not permit this Court to authorize a reply brief in excess of the brief filed in opposition. See LCR 7(f)(4) (“In all cases, the reply brief shall not exceed one-half the total length of the brief filed in opposition.”).

Accordingly, having reviewed Plaintiffs' Motion, the Court hereby ORDERS:

(1) Plaintiffs' Motion (dkt. # 103) is DENIED.

(2) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to the parties and to the Honorable Richard A. Jones.


Summaries of

Integrative Health Inst. v. Schaffner

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Dec 1, 2021
No. C20-1471-RAJ-MLP (W.D. Wash. Dec. 1, 2021)
Case details for

Integrative Health Inst. v. Schaffner

Case Details

Full title:INTEGRATIVE HEALTH INSTITUTE PLLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CHRISTINE…

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Dec 1, 2021

Citations

No. C20-1471-RAJ-MLP (W.D. Wash. Dec. 1, 2021)