Paul D. Asmus v. United Airlines, Inc.

Opinion

1 2 6 7 PAUL D ASMUS, Case No. 5:26-cv-00962-BLF 8 Plaintiff, V. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 9 LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY UNITED AIRLINES, INC., 10 [Re: ECF No. 18] Defendant. 1] a 12 Pro se Plaintiff moved to file a sur-reply after Defendant filed its reply in support of its 13 a motion to dismiss. ECF No. 18. Defendant opposes the motion. ECF No. 19. “Once a reply is 14 filed, no additional memoranda, papers or letters may be filed without prior Court approval,” 15 except to object to evidence first proffered in a reply brief or to provide a statement of recent 16 decision. Civ. L.R. 7-3(d). “Parties do not have the right to file sur[-]replies and .. . [t]he Court vo (17 generally views motions for leave to file a sur[-]reply with disfavor. Although the court may in its Z 18 discretion permit the filing of a sur-reply, this discretion should be exercised in favor of allowing a 19 sur-reply only where a valid reason for such additional briefing exists, such as where the movant 20 raises new arguments in its reply brief.” Van Hees v. BAM Trading Serv., Inc., No. 25-cv-05685- 21 JST, 2025 WL 3026497, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 29, 2025) (alterations in original) (internal 22 quotation marks and citations omitted). Plaintiff having failed to establish good cause, the Court 23 DENIES the motion. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 Dated: June 3, 2026

27 ETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge