Free Order - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-02193-LAB-WMC

Document 25

Filed 04/23/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Plaintiffs, 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 By Order entered April 9, 2008, this court ordered plaintiff in this putative class action to submit additional briefing on discrete issues uniquely within the knowledge of plaintiff or easily ascertainable by him for purposes of assisting the court to efficiently address jurisdictional and other foundational issues associated with its ruling on defendant's fullybriefed Motion To Dismiss First Amended Complaint ("FAC"), presently under submission for decision on the papers. Dkt No. 22. That Order expressly limited plaintiff's Supplemental Brief and supporting evidence to a length not to exceed ten (10) pages, and set a responsive pleading schedule. Plaintiff has responded to that Order by filing a 16-page "Main Document," a fourpage Declaration, a second declaration 16 pages in length, and exhibits totaling 16 more -107cv2193

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD STANFORD, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated and on behalf of the general public, vs.

CASE NO. 07cv2193-LAB (WMc) ORDER REJECTING RESPONSE TO ORDER REQUIRING ADDITIONAL BRIEFING AND RESETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE [Dkt Nos. 23,24]

HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants.

Case 3:07-cv-02193-LAB-WMC

Document 25

Filed 04/23/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

pages. Dkt No. 23 (totaling 52 pages). Plaintiff simultaneously filed an 11-page "Main Document," a Memorandum of Points and Authorities also 11 pages in length, a 16-page Declaration, a four-page Declaration, and exhibits totaling 16 pages. Dkt No. 24 (totaling 58 pages). Plaintiff completely disregarded the restrictions in the Order in favor of re-arguing his Opposition to the Motion To Dismiss. He has either ignored the court's solicitation of narrowly-tailored discrete information, evidence, and legal argument or has buried responsive material. The court REJECTS both Docket Nos. 23 and 24 in their entireties as non-responsive to its Order. As the court is inclined to consider matters outside the FAC (notably an actual permit defendant purports to substantiate was obtained before plaintiff filed his complaint, among other things), as is its prerogative under FED .R.CIV.P. 12(d) (provided a reasonable opportunity is given to all parties to present all the material that is pertinent to the motion as the court has identified that material in its Order Requiring Additional Briefing), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the court accords plaintiff a final opportunity to file a Supplemental Brief with supporting evidence conforming to the court's April 9, 2008 Order Requiring Additional Briefing. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the original schedule for the supplemental briefing is continued: on or before April 30, 2008 plaintiff may file a responsive

Supplemental Brief as initially instructed; on or before May 7, 2008, defendant may respond as initially instructed; on or before May 14, 2008 plaintiff may file a Reply to defendant's supplemental briefing, not to exceed a total of five (5) pages. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: April 22, 2008

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS United States District Judge

-2-

07cv2193