Drevaleva v. McDonough
Trial Court Opinion
4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 TATYANA EVGENIEVNA Case No. 22-cv-00887-JST DREVALEVA, 8 wo.
Plaintiff, ORDER EXTENDING DEADLINE TO 9 y FILE REPLY 10 Re: ECF No. 41 DENIS RICHARD MCDONOUGH, et al., 11 Defendants. a 12 & 13 The Court grants Plaintiff Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva’s motion to extend the deadline S to file her reply from June 13, 2022 to June 20, 2022. ECF No. 41.
Plaintiffs request to file a reply brief of longer than 15 pages is denied.
Plaintiff states that she “cited numerous statutes in [her] Reply that [she] hadn’t cited in [her] First Motion to Strike.” Jd. at 3. Plaintiff is reminded that the Court does not ordinarily consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief. See Cardone v. Cnty. of Alameda, No. 19-cv-00221-JST, 2019 WL 7816822, at *3 n.4 (N.D. Cal. July 30, 2019).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 15, 2022 3 JON S. TIGAR nited States District Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.