UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 7, 2007
CASE TITLE: MYTEE PRODUCTS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: M. James Lorenz United States District Court Judge
NOTICE OF DOCUMENT DISCREPANCIES AND ORDER THEREON
DOCKET NO.: 16
DOCUMENT TITLE: Amended Counterclaim
DOCUMENT FILED BY: Harris Research, Inc.
Upon the electronic filing of the above referenced document(s), the following discrepancies are noted:
Civil Local Rule or Discrepancy
Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual provision
Includes a proposed order or requires judge's signature ECF § 2(a), (g) Docket entry does not accurately reflect the document filed
Multiple pleadings in one docket entry not separated out as attachments Lacking proper signature Civ. L. Rule 5.1 Missing time and date on motion and/or supporting documentation Civ. L. Rule 7.1 or 47.1 Date noticed for hearing not in compliance with rules/Document(s) are not timely Civ. L. Rule 7.1 or 47.1 Lacking memorandum of points and authorities in support as a separate document Civ. L. Rule 7.1 or 47.1 Briefs or memoranda exceed length restrictions Civ. L. Rule 7.1 Missing table of contents Civ. L. Rule 15.1 Amended pleading not complete in itself Civ. L. Rule 30.1 Depositions not accepted absent a court order
Supplemental documents require court order OTHER: the filing of an amended counterclaim is premature until the joint motion is ruled upon.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
The document is accepted despite the discrepancy noted above. Any further non-compliant documents may be stricken from the record.
The document is rejected. It is ordered that the Clerk STRIKE the document from the record, and serve a copy of this order on all parties.
Counsel is advised that any further failure to comply with the Local Rules or Electronic Case Filing Administrative Policies and Procedures Manual may lead to penalties pursuant to Civil Local Rule 83.1.
© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.