3100 Arsenal Holdings, LLC v. Tremco Incorporated

E.D. Missouri

3100 Arsenal Holdings, LLC v. Tremco Incorporated

DecidedJuly 2, 2021

Docket4:20-cv-00424

StatusUnknown

This text of 3100 Arsenal Holdings, LLC v. Tremco Incorporated (3100 Arsenal Holdings, LLC v. Tremco Incorporated) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

3100 Arsenal Holdings, LLC v. Tremco Incorporated, (E.D. Mo. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

3100 ARSENAL HOLDINGS, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 4:20-CV-424 RLW ) TREMCO INCORPORATED, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 46). After careful consideration, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s motion. On May 17, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion to extend discovery and dispositive motion deadlines by 60 days. (ECF No. 33). Defendants filed their Motion for Summary Judgment on June 29, 2021 (ECF No. 43) in accordance with the Court’s Case Management Order. (ECF No. 21). Plaintiff seeks to strike Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on the grounds that the Court has not yet ruled on Plaintiff’s motion for extension and Plaintiff has been unable to conduct necessary depositions in this matter. The Court has since denied Plaintiff’s motion for extension, noting that Plaintiff has had ample time to complete discovery. Under Rule 12(f), a court may “strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). “Only material included in a ‘pleading’ may be the subject of a motion to strike, and courts have been unwilling to construe the term broadly.” 2 James W. Moore, et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 12.37[2] (2021). “Motions, briefs or memoranda, objections, or affidavits may not be attacked by the motion to strike.” Id. This Court restricts the use of motions to strike to material contained in pleadings. See, e.g., Metropolitan Cas. Ins. Co. v. Combs, 2014 WL 988452, at *2 CE.D. Mo. Mar. 13, 2014) (amended motion to dismiss was not a pleading and could not be attacked with a motion to strike). Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is not a pleading and thus cannot be stricken under Rule 12(f). Even if it was a pleading, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous. Plaintiff's only basis for its motion is that it needs additional time to perform discovery. Plaintiff provides insufficient grounds to strike Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Therefore, the Court will deny Plaintiff's Motion to Strike. Nothing in this Order, however, precludes Plaintiff from pursuing other avenues of relief, including those made available by Rule 56(d). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Strike (ECF No. 46) is DENIED without prejudice.

RONNIE L. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated this 2nd day of July, 2021.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

3100 ARSENAL HOLDINGS, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 4:20-CV-424 RLW ) TREMCO INCORPORATED, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 46). After careful consideration, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s motion. On May 17, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion to extend discovery and dispositive motion deadlines by 60 days. (ECF No. 33). Defendants filed their Motion for Summary Judgment on June 29, 2021 (ECF No. 43) in accordance with the Court’s Case Management Order. (ECF No. 21). Plaintiff seeks to strike Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on the grounds that the Court has not yet ruled on Plaintiff’s motion for extension and Plaintiff has been unable to conduct necessary depositions in this matter. The Court has since denied Plaintiff’s motion for extension, noting that Plaintiff has had ample time to complete discovery. Under Rule 12(f), a court may “strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). “Only material included in a ‘pleading’ may be the subject of a motion to strike, and courts have been unwilling to construe the term broadly.” 2 James W. Moore, et al., Moore’s Federal Practice § 12.37[2] (2021). “Motions, briefs or memoranda, objections, or affidavits may not be attacked by the motion to strike.” Id. This Court restricts the use of motions to strike to material contained in pleadings. See, e.g., Metropolitan Cas. Ins. Co. v. Combs, 2014 WL 988452, at *2 CE.D. Mo. Mar. 13, 2014) (amended motion to dismiss was not a pleading and could not be attacked with a motion to strike). Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is not a pleading and thus cannot be stricken under Rule 12(f). Even if it was a pleading, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous. Plaintiff's only basis for its motion is that it needs additional time to perform discovery. Plaintiff provides insufficient grounds to strike Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Therefore, the Court will deny Plaintiff's Motion to Strike. Nothing in this Order, however, precludes Plaintiff from pursuing other avenues of relief, including those made available by Rule 56(d). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Strike (ECF No. 46) is DENIED without prejudice.

RONNIE L. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated this 2nd day of July, 2021.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3100 Arsenal Holdings, LLC v. Tremco Incorporated, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/3100-arsenal-holdings-llc-v-tremco-incorporated-moed-2021.