Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. H-12-3492
08-05-2014
ORDER
On July 18, 2014, the defendants filed a 56 page summary-judgment motion concurrently with a motion to exceed the court's 25 page limit for summary-judgment motions. The plaintiff filed a response to the motion to exceed the page limit and argued that the motion was excessive and contained unnecessary facts. The certified administrative record in this case is a voluminous 1,500 pages and the issues involve a detailed and a complex regulatory framework. Due to the complexity of the record and the legal issues, the court grants the motion to exceed the page limit. See Golden v. Austin Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, No. 4:09-cv-817, 2009 WL 3734153, at *1 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 5, 2009); Harris v. Fresenius Med. Care, No. 4:04-cv-4807, 2006 WL 2065313, at *1 n.2 (S.D. Tex. July 24, 2006); Colindres v. Quietflex Mfg., 427 F. Supp. 2d 737, 740 n.2 (S.D. Tex. 2006). The plaintiffs may move for an extension of time to respond or to exceed the response brief page limit.
SIGNED on August 5, 2014, at Houston, Texas.
/s/_________
Lee H. Rosenthal
United States District Judge