Opinion
Case No. 8:07-cv-977-T-24-MSS.
August 8, 2007
ORDER
This cause comes before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Notice of Supplemental Authority (Doc. No. 31). Plaintiff Alfred L. Williams, II ("Plaintiff") opposes this motion (Doc. No. 35).
On July 9, 2007, Plaintiff filed a motion for remand, to which Defendant Heritage Operating, L.P. ("Defendant") filed a response in opposition (Doc. Nos. 15 and 24). On August 2, 2007, Plaintiff filed a notice of filing supplemental authority, in which he cited a July 31, 2007 decision in support of his motion for remand (Doc. No. 30). In response, Defendant filed the instant motion to strike.
Defendant argues that United Broadcasting Corp. v. Miami Tele-Communications, 140 F.R.D. 12 (S.D. Fla. 1991), requires that Plaintiff first seek leave of the Court before filing any additional authority regarding his motion for remand. In United Broadcasting, the court stated that, "a "notice of supplemental authority" that raises an argument that is not in defendant's previous memorandum in opposition is in fact an attempt at a sur-response, which is not permitted in the absence of court order." United Broadcasting, 140 FRD at 13 (emphasis added). While it is true that Local Rule 3.01(c) requires a party to seek leave of court before filing any reply or further memorandum directed to a motion or response, the Court finds that the notice of filing supplemental authority at issue does not fall within the purview of that rule. Plaintiff's notice of filing supplemental authority does not raise an argument that was not in his motion for remand, it merely provides a recent case in support of the arguments already raised that motion. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Notice of Supplemental Authority (Doc. No. 31) is DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida.