Wilcox v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 BRUCE WILCOX, etal, Case No. 2:20-cv-01545-JAD-NJK 5 Plaintiffs, ORDER [Docket No. 91] PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, 7) LLC, 8 Defendant. 9 Plaintiffs have filed a notice on the Docket. See Docket No. 91 (notice of false 10} declarations). 11 District courts have authority to strike an improper filing under their inherent power to 12|| control the docket. E.g., Ready Transp., Inc. v. AAR Mfg., Inc., 627 F.3d 402, 404 (9th Cir. 2010); 13|| Metzger v. Hussman, 682 F. Supp. 1109, 1110-11 (D. Nev. 1988). “Striking material under the 14] Court’s inherent power is wholly discretionary.” Fed. Nat’] Mortg. Assoc. v. Willis, 2016 WL 15] 11247554, at *1 (D. Nev. Oct. 14, 2016). Courts also have a general duty to avoid deciding unnecessary issues. See, e.g., U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n v. Jensen, 835 F.3d 1100, 1113 n.6 (9th Cir. 2016). In deciding whether to exercise their discretion to strike an improper filing, courts 18] consider whether striking the filmg would “further the overall resolution of the action,” and 19} whether the filer has a history of excessive and repetitive filing that have complicated proceedings. 20] Jones v. Skolnik, 2015 WL 685228, at *2 (D. Nev. Feb. 18, 2015). 21 Plaintiffs’ filings present no dispute to the Court to resolve in furthering the resolution of 22] this action. Additionally, the filings fail to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 23] this Court’s Local Rules. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b); Local Rule 7-2. 24 Accordingly, the Clerk’s Office is INSTRUCTED to strike the filing at Docket No. 91. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. oS 26 Dated: June 12, 2023 BR SS oo — Nancy J. k ofspe 27 United States Magistrate Judge 28