IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 19, 2012
LORENA MEYER, PLAINTIFF,
SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
This is a federal question action brought by plaintiff Lorena Meyer, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, involving a claim for violation of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. It also includes supplemental state law claims for violation of California's Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and invasion of privacy.*fn1
On April 16, 2012, plaintiff filed a "rebuttal to defendant's objections to requests for discovery, and request for the court to reconsider there are new facts, etc." (Dkt. No. 49.) To the extent plaintiff's filing can be construed as a motion to compel, plaintiff has failed to comply with the requirements of E.D. Cal. L.R. 251. To the extent plaintiff's filing can be construed as seeking some type of other relief, such as further leave to amend her complaint, plaintiff failed to abide by the notice and filing requirements of E.D. Cal. L.R. 230.
In light of plaintiff's pro se status, the court previously referred plaintiff to the applicable local rules outlining the procedure for how motions should be filed and noticed. (Dkt. No. 45.) The court also provided plaintiff with some basic instruction regarding discovery procedure and the filing of discovery motions. (Dkt. No. 44.) Plaintiff was cautioned on several occasions that improperly noticed motions would be stricken. (Dkt. Nos. 45, 48.) Therefore, the court will strike the instant motion for failure to follow the Local Rules and court orders.
Accordingly, for the reasons outlined above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's "rebuttal to defendant's objections to requests for discovery, and request for the court to reconsider there are new facts, etc." (dkt. no. 49) is STRICKEN.