Tyler v. Valley MRI and Radiology, Inc.

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA | Richard and Arretta Tyler, No. 2:19-cv-0065 1-KJM-AC 11 Plaintiffs, ORDER 12 v. 13 Valley MRI and Radiology, Inc., et al., 4 Defendants.

16 The matter is before the court on the defense motion to strike the plaintiffs’ reply brief in | support of their motion for partial summary judgment or, in the alternative, for leave to file a | surreply. ECF No. 42. The plaintiffs do not oppose the alternative request for leave to file a | surreply to address evidence cited and arguments advanced for the first time in reply. ECF | No. 44. The court grants that alternative relief for good cause shown. Amalgamated Transit | Union, Int’l v. United States Dep’t of Lab., No. 20-00953, 2021 WL 2003104, at *1 (E.D. Cal. | May 19, 2021) (granting an unopposed motion to file a sur-reply to address purportedly new | evidence). Within twenty-one days, defendants may file a surreply brief no longer than five | pages to address any evidence cited or arguments raised for the first time in reply.

25 This order resolves ECF No. 42.

26 IT IS SO ORDERED.

27 DATED: June 8, 2021.

28 aiull CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE