Adobe Systems Incorporated v. A & S Electronics, Inc. et al

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-02288

ORDER STRIKING NON-COMPLIANT MOTIONS. Signed by Judge Saundra B. Armstrong on 10/16/15.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 OAKLAND DIVISION 5 6 ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED, a Case No: C 15-2288 SBA Delaware Corporation, 7 ORDER STRIKING NON- Plaintiff, COMPLIANT MOTIONS 8 vs. Dkt. 44, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 9 A & S ELECTRONICS, INC., a California 10 Corporation d/b/a TRUSTPRICE; ALAN Z. LIN, an Individual; and DOES 1-10, 11 Inclusive, 12 Defendants. 13 14 The Court's Standing Orders specify that the maximum page limit for motions and 15 oppositions thereto is fifteen pages. Dkt. 16. The Standing Orders further state that any 16 brief filed "in an improper manner or form shall not be received or considered by the 17 Court." Id.; see Swanson v. U.S. Forest Serv., 87 F.3d 339, 345 (9th Cir. 1996) (courts 18 have discretion to strike oversized briefs). 19 Defendants have filed a nineteen-page motion to dismiss and a separate six-page 20 motion for more definite statement. Dkt. 44, 46. In response, Plaintiff filed two fifteen- 21 page oppositions, one in response to each motion. Defendants' motion to dismiss clearly 22 violates the Court's Standing Orders. Dkt. 47, 48. In addition, the Court finds that 23 Defendants' filing of a separate motion for a more definite statement is excessive. Such a 24 motion should have been brought in the alternative to a motion to dismiss—not as a 25 separate, stand-alone motion. See Schwarzer et al, Prac. Guide Fed. Civ. Proc. Before Trial 26 (Nat Ed.) ¶ 9:13 (TRG 2014). Accordingly, 27 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT all briefs filed in connection with Defendants' 28 motion to dismiss and motion for a more definite statement are STRICKEN. The Clerk 1 shall strike Dkt. 44, 46, 47, 48, 50 and 51 from the record. Defendants are granted leave to 2 file a combined motion to dismiss, or in the alternative, a motion for a more definite 3 statement within seven days of the date this Order is filed. Plaintiff shall file a single 4 opposition brief no later than seven days after the motion is filed. Defendants' reply shall 5 be filed three days after Plaintiffs file their opposition. The parties' stipulation to advance 6 the hearing date from December 9, 2015, to November 12, 2015, is DENIED as moot. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 Dated: 10/16/15 ______________________________ SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-