Jacob v. Ramirez

Full title: MICHAEL C. JACOB, Plaintiff, v. M.T. RAMIREZ, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: May 19, 2011

No. CIV S-10-0692 FCD DAD P (E.D. Cal. May. 19, 2011)

Opinion

No. CIV S-10-0692 FCD DAD P.

May 19, 2011

ORDER

DALE DROZD, Magistrate Judge

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action for relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 13, 2011, plaintiff filed a response to defendants' answer to plaintiff's amended complaint. Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides as follows:

There shall be a complaint and an answer; a reply to a counterclaim denominated as such; an answer to a cross-claim, if the answer contains a cross-claim; a third-party complaint, if a person who was not an original party is summoned under the provisions of Rule 14; and a third-party answer, if a third-party complaint is served. No other pleading shall be allowed, except that the court may order a reply to an answer or a third-party answer.

Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(a) (emphasis added). The court has not ordered plaintiff to reply to defendants' answer and declines to make such an order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's May 13, 2011 response to defendants' answer to plaintiff's amended complaint shall be disregarded.

DATED: May 18, 2011.