From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Milyakov v. JP Morgan Chase, N.A.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 29, 2011
No. C 11-02066 WHA (N.D. Cal. Nov. 29, 2011)

Opinion

No. C 11-02066 WHA

11-29-2011

EMIL P. MILYAKOV and MAGDALENA A.APOSTOLOVA, Plaintiffs, v. JP MORGAN CHASE, N.A., HSBC BANK USA, NA, CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE CO., PAUL FINANCIAL, LLC, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. (MERS), FOUNDATION CONVEYANCING, LLC, and DOES 1 through 100, Defendants.


ORDER STRIKING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF

Pro se plaintiffs Emil Milyakov and Magdalena Apostolova have filed a "supplemental brief in support of the motion to remand as an alternative to continue the hearing on the motion for summary judgment" (Dkt. No. 79). Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-3(d) "once a reply is filed, no additional memoranda, papers or letters may be filed without prior Court approval" unless new evidence has been submitted in the reply brief or the party seeks to file a statement of recent decision. Plaintiffs filed a reply to the motion to remand on November 15, 2011. The supplemental brief in support of the motion to remand is not a statement of recent decision. Plaintiffs were not granted leave to file the supplemental brief. Briefing on the motion to remand has closed. Plaintiffs' submission at this time is improper. Thus, the supplemental brief is STRICKEN.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Milyakov v. JP Morgan Chase, N.A.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 29, 2011
No. C 11-02066 WHA (N.D. Cal. Nov. 29, 2011)
Case details for

Milyakov v. JP Morgan Chase, N.A.

Case Details

Full title:EMIL P. MILYAKOV and MAGDALENA A.APOSTOLOVA, Plaintiffs, v. JP MORGAN…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 29, 2011

Citations

No. C 11-02066 WHA (N.D. Cal. Nov. 29, 2011)