Moturi v. Asher

6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 7 AT SEATTLE SUDHEER RAO MOTURI, CASE NO. C19-2023 RSM-BAT 9 Petitioner, MINUTE ORDER 10 v. 11 NATHALIE ASHER, Director of the Seattle Field Office of U.S. Immigration and 12 Customs Enforcement; et al., 13 Respondents.

15 The following MINUTE ORDER is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable Ricardo S. Martinez, Chief United States District Judge: 17 On April 28, 2020, Respondents filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority attaching four declarations. Dkt. #42. Respondents filed three of the declarations under seal (Dkt. #43) and concurrently filed a Motion to Seal (Dkt. #41). Local Civil Rule 7(n) provides that prior to the Court ruling “on a pending motion, a party may bring to the court’s attention relevant authority issued after the date the party’s last brief was filed by serving and filing a Notice of Supplemental Authority that attaches the supplemental authority without argument.” LCR 7(n).

23 The Court has never interpreted that rule to allow a party to submit substantive evidence after briefing has been completed. See United States v. Microsoft Corp., No. C15-102RSM, 2015 1 WL 4496749, at *2 n.1 (W.D. Wash. June 17, 2015) (noting that LCR 7(n) provides a process “to bring new authority to the Court’s attention, not new evidence”) (emphasis in original); Blough v. Shea Homes, Inc., No. C12-1493RSM, 2014 WL 3694231, at *18 (W.D. Wash. July 23, 2014) (striking supplemental exhibit filed, without leave of the Court, after the noting date).

5 Accordingly, the Court STRIKES the declarations (Dkt. #42-1; Dkt. #43; Dkt. #43-1; and Dkt. #43-2) as procedurally improper. Because the Court strikes the declarations filed under seal from the record, the Court DENIES Respondent’s Motion to Seal (Dkt. #41) as moot.

8 DATED this 29th day of April, 2020.

WILLIAM McCOOL, Clerk By: /s/ Paula McNabb 11 Deputy Clerk