Joseph v. Stryker Corp.

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA | Bincymol Joseph, No. 2:18-CV-00370-KJM-CKD 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. Stryker Corporation, et. al, 1S Defendants.

17 Defendant Davis Tool moves to dismiss the claims plaintiff Bincymol Joseph brings | against it. Mot., ECF No. 46. Davis Tool argues it should be dismissed because Ninth Circuit | precedent and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c) require this court to apply the law of the | California Doe statute, which dictates the rule for extending the statute of limitations. Reply at 2, | ECF No. 49 (citing Lindley v. General Electric Co., 780 F.2d 797 (9th Cir. 1986)). As this | argument was raised for the first time in a reply brief, the court orders Joseph to file a sur- | reply, no more than five pages in length, within seven days of this order.

24 IT IS SO ORDERED.

25 DATED: September 13, 2021.