Opinion
2:08-cr-00126-KJD-PAL
08-08-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. NAJEEB RAHMAN, Defendant.
ORDER
Kent J. Dawson, United States District Judge
Presently before the Court is the United States' Motion for Leave to File Surreply (#274). Local Rule LR 7-2 provides that surreplies “are not permitted without leave of court[.]” LR 7-2(b). “The U.S. District Courts in Nevada interpret Local Rule 7-2 to allow filing of surreplies only to address new matters raised in a reply to which a party would otherwise be unable to respond.” Ernest Bock, L.L.C. v. Steelman, No. 2:19-CV-01065-JAD-EJY, 2020 WL 1258360, at *2 (D. Nev. Mar. 16, 2020) (simplified). The United States argues that Defendant's initial motion (#267) failed to attach documents that Defendant's motion relied upon. (See #274). However, Defendant's subsequent replies (#271/272/273) included the missing attachments. (See #271, 272, 273). As the United States was not able to address these attachments in its response, the United States will be allowed to file a surreply.
IT IS THERFORE ORDERED that the United States' motion (#274) is GRANTED.