1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 BROOK MANCINELLI, Case No. 25-cv-08246-JST

8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 9 v. LEAVE TO FILE SURREPLY

10 MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., Re: ECF No. 28 Defendant. 11

12

13 Before the Court is Defendant Marriott International, Inc.’s motion for leave to file a 14 surreply to the motion for remand. ECF No. 28. Marriott argues that it needs a surreply to (1) 15 respond to Plaintiff Brook Mancinelli’s evidentiary objections to the opposition and (2) provide 16 additional evidence in opposition to Plaintiff’s motion to “moot” those objections. Id. at 2. 17 Marriott also argues that it needs to respond to a new argument in Mancinelli’s reply regarding 18 equitable jurisdiction. Id. at 2. Mancinelli opposes the motion, arguing that Defendant should not 19 be permitted to file now evidence it could have submitted earlier with its opposition, and that 20 Plaintiff made an equitable jurisdiction argument in its reply brief to respond to Marriott’s 21 argument, in its opposition brief, that Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief is now moot. ECF 22 No. 31. 23 The Court agrees with Mancinelli that seeking to submit evidence that could have been 24 included with an opposition brief is not a basis to seek a surreply. See, e.g., Arceo v. Arden Mills, 25 LLC,

, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2023) (denying leave to file surreply to 26 supplement additional facts that could have been included in the original opposition). As for the 27 equitable jurisdiction argument, the Court agrees with Marriott that the argument was raised for 1 the first time in the reply. However, the Court will deny Marriott’s request to file a surreply to 2 || address the new argument and instead will exercise its discretion to exclude the argument from 3 consideration. See Zamani v. Carnes,

, 997 (9th Cir. 2007) (“The district court need 4 || not consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief.”); United States v. Anderson, 472 5 || F.3d 662, 668 (9th Cir. 2006) (“Issues raised for the first time ina... reply brief are generally 6 || deemed waived.”) 7 For the foregoing reason, the Court denies Marriott’s request for leave to file a motion for 8 a surreply. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED.

10 Dated: December 18, 2025 M JON S. TIG 12 United States District Judge

15 16

it

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28