From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Potter

United States District Court, D. Colorado
Jan 11, 2011
Civil Action No. 10-cv-02457-WYD-KMT (D. Colo. Jan. 11, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 10-cv-02457-WYD-KMT.

January 11, 2011


ORDER


This matter is before the court on "Defendant's Motion to Strike Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(f)(2)" (Doc. No. 20, filed January 11, 2011).

Federal Rule of Procedure 12(f) provides that "[t]he court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(f) (emphasis added). Motions and other papers are not pleadings. See Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 7. "[T]here is no provision in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for motions to strike motions and memoranda." Searcy v. Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 91-4181, 1992 WL 43490, at *2, (10th Cir. March 2, 1992) (unpublished). "Only material included in a 'pleading' may be the subject of a motion to strike, and courts have been unwilling to construe the term broadly. Motions, briefs, or memoranda, objections, or affidavits may not be attacked by the motion to strike." 2 JAMES WM. MOORE ET.AL., MOORE'S FEDERAL PRACTICE § 12.37[2] (3d ed. 2004) (cited with approval in Searcy). Plaintiff's "Objection" (Doc. No. 18) is not a pleading that may be the subject of a motion to strike.

Accordingly, "Defendant's Motion to Strike Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(f)(2)" (Doc. No. 20) is DENIED.

Dated this 11th day of January, 2011.


Summaries of

Williams v. Potter

United States District Court, D. Colorado
Jan 11, 2011
Civil Action No. 10-cv-02457-WYD-KMT (D. Colo. Jan. 11, 2011)
Case details for

Williams v. Potter

Case Details

Full title:DALE I. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. JOHN E. POTTER, Postmaster General United…

Court:United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Jan 11, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 10-cv-02457-WYD-KMT (D. Colo. Jan. 11, 2011)