United States v. LASR Clinic of Summerlin, LLC
United States v. LASR Clinic of Summerlin, LLC
Trial Court Opinion
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 11 Case No.: 2:19-cv-00467-GMN-NJK Plaintiff(s), 12 ORDER v. 13 [Docket Nos. 75, 77] LASR CLINIC OF SUMMERLIN, LLC, et 14 al., 15 Defendant(s). 16 Pending before the Court are Defendants’ motions for more definite statement. Docket 17 Nos. 75, 77.1 The Government filed a response in opposition. Docket No. 82. Defendants filed a 18 reply. Docket No. 83. The motions are properly resolved without a hearing. See Local Rule 78- 19 1. For the reasons discussed below, the motions for more definite statement are DENIED. 20 A motion for more definite statement is made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21 12(e), which requires the filing of an amended pleading where the initial pleading is “so vague or 22 ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably prepare a response. The motion must be made before 23 filing a responsive pleading and must point out the defects complained of and the details desired.” 24 Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(e). “Rule 12(e) is designed to strike at unintelligibility, rather than want of 25 detail.” Woods v. Reno Commodities, Inc.,
600 F. Supp. 574, 580(D. Nev. 1984). “Parties are 26 expected to use discovery, not the pleadings, to learn the specifics of the claims being asserted.” 27 1 As they are proceeding pro se, the Court construes Defendants’ filings liberally. See 28 Erickson v. Pardus,
551 U.S. 89, 94(2007). OneBeacon Ins. Co. v. Probuilders Specialty Ins. Co.,
2009 WL 2407705, *4 (D. Nev. Aug. 3, 2|| 2009) (quoting Sagan v. Apple Computer, Inc.,
874 F. Supp. 1072, 1077(C.D.Cal. 1994)). Motions 3] for a more definite statement are disfavored and rarely granted. E.g., Russell Road Food & Bev., LLC v. Galam,
2013 WL 6684631, at *2 (D. Nev. Dec. 17, 2013). 5 The Court has reviewed the complaint and agrees with the Government that it is not vague 6]| or ambiguous such that a response cannot be formed. 7 Accordingly, the motions for more definite statement are DENIED. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: February 9, 2021 Ue. Nancy JaKoppe\ 11 United States-Magistrate Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown