Urrutia v. Quill

Full title: SAVADORE URRUTIA, JR., Plaintiff v. DIANNE QUILL, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: May 24, 2005

Civil Action No. 1:05-CV-0259 (M.D. Pa. May. 24, 2005)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 1:05-CV-0259.

May 24, 2005

ORDER

CHRISTOPHER CONNER, District Judge

AND NOW, this 24th day of May, 2005, upon consideration of plaintiff's motion to strike (Doc. 18) the motion to dismiss,¹ it is hereby ORDERED that:

1 Plaintiff argues that the motion should be stricken due to defendants' failure to file timely their brief in support. See L.R. 7.5 ("Within ten (10) days after the filing of any motion . . . the party filing the same shall file a brief. . . . [or] such motion shall be deemed withdrawn."). The court notes that although defendants' brief was filed four days out of time (compare Doc. 9 with Doc. 13), plaintiff did not file any brief in support of the instant motion.

1. The motion to strike (Doc. 18) is DENIED.

2. Plaintiff shall a brief in opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. 9) on or before June 3, 2005. Failure to comply with this order may result in the granting of the motion or the dismissal of this case for failure to prosecute. See L.R. 7.6; FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b).