Opinion
3:22-cv-05544-TL
03-09-2023
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Plaintiffs, v. DAVID W. DANNER, in his official capacity as Chair of the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
Tana Lin United States District Judge
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Union Pacific Railroad Company's motion for leave to file a response (Dkt. No. 23) to the notice of supplemental authority filed by Defendants David W Danner et al. (Dkt. No. 22) related to their pending Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 18). A party is allowed to file notice of supplemental authority related to a pending motion without argument. LCR 7(n). Defendants complied with this rule. The rule does not contemplate responsive briefing for such a notice. Nevertheless, Plaintiff attached its proposed responsive briefing to its motion for leave to respond to the notice, placing its legal arguments regarding the supplemental authority on the record without first securing the Court's leave to do so.
The Court also notes that Plaintiff's motion does not contain a certification that the Parties met and conferred prior to its filing this non-dispositive motion, as required per Section II.D. of Judge Lin's Standing Order for All Civil Cases. All Parties are expected to comply with all relevant rules of this Court, including the standing order.
Consequently, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff's motion to be terminated, as it is essentially moot, and DIRECTS the Clerk to revise the docket entry at Dkt. No. 23 to reflect that it is Plaintiff's response to Defendant's notice of supplemental authority. Any future attempt by Plaintiff to circumvent the applicable rules without prior leave of the Court could result in sanctions. The Court further GRANTS Defendants leave to file a reply brief of no more than 2 pages, if they so desire, by no later than Monday, March 13, 2023.
Dated this 9th day of March 2023.