Morisky v. MMAS Research LLC

Full title: DONALD E. MORISKY, Plaintiff, v. MMAS RESEARCH LLC, et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Jul 6, 2023

2:21-CV-1301-RSM-DWC (W.D. Wash. Jul. 6, 2023)

Opinion

2:21-CV-1301-RSM-DWC

07-06-2023

DONALD E. MORISKY, Plaintiff, v. MMAS RESEARCH LLC, et al., Defendants.

David W. Christel, Chief United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER STRIKING DOCKET ENTRIES 146 & 148 AND DIRECTING DOCKET ENTRY 146 BE SEALED

David W. Christel, Chief United States Magistrate Judge

On June 5, 2023, the Court determined Defendants submitted filings that were not in compliance with the Local Civil Rules (LCR). See Dkt. 137. The Court directed the parties to “ensure all future filings comply with the LCRs.” Id. The Court warned that if a filing did not comply with the LCRs, the Court may strike the filing without further consideration. Id.

On June 26, 2023, Defendants filed a Motion in Limine. Dkt. 146. The Motion does not comply with the LCRs. For example, the Motion is not on numbered paper and does not include the bottom notation. On June 28, 2023, Defendants filed the Declaration of Steven Trubow. Dkt. 148. It is unclear what filing this declaration supports; regardless, the declaration does not comply with the LCRs. For example, the declaration does not include the proper bottom notation and is not on numbered paper. See LCR 10. Moreover, Mr. Trubow cannot electronically sign a declaration. Therefore, the declaration has not been properly signed and submitted.

The Court warned the parties future filings that do not comply with the LCRs may be stricken. Defendants have again submitted filings that contain the same deficiencies as previously noted by the Court. As Defendants filings do not comply with the LCRs, the Clerk is directed to strike Docket Entries 146 and 148.

The Court also notes Defendants have continued to file documents that allegedly contain attorney-client communications. See Dkt. 146. The parties are directed to refrain from filing documents that contain attorney-client communications. If such filing is necessary, the party must file the document containing such communications under seal until the District Judge assigned to this case has an opportunity rule on the admissibility of such communications. The Clerk is directed to place Docket Entry 146 under seal.