Silva v. Sanders

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE RAMON SAUL SILVA, JR., CASE NO. 2:21-cv-00472-JHC Plaintiff, ORDER v. BENJAMIN SANDERS, Defendant.

14 This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Benjamin Sanders’s motion to strike Plaintiff’s reply (Dkt. # 48). Plaintiff Ramon Saul Silva, Jr. objected to a report and recommendation (Dkt. # 45), Defendant filed a response (Dkt. # 46), and Plaintiff filed a reply to the response (Dkt. # 47). Defendant moves to strike the reply, arguing that this Court will not consider such a reply under Local Civil Rule (LCR) 72(b). Plaintiff opposes the motion, explaining that he is pro se in multiple cases and that he made a mistake (Dkt. # 49). LCR 72(b), which addresses objections to a report and recommendation, states, “No reply will be considered.” The Court thus GRANTS the motion to strike on that basis. See also Lambert v. Dennis, No. C15-1213-RSM, 2016 WL 7441012, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Dec. 27, 2016), aff’d, 737 23 F. App’x 354 (9th Cir. 2018) (“The Court will not consider Plaintiff’s Reply”). l The Clerk is directed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and || to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.

3 Dated this 16th day of May, 2022.

4 ] obo Chur 5 John H. Chun United States District Judge 1]