All motions must be supported by memorandum, not to exceed 15 pages. See Local Rule 7.1. Alternatively, the motion may contain the principle argument and relevant authority that otherwise would comprise a supporting memorandum. Skeletal and unsupported arguments will not be considered and the argument will be deemed waived. See Perry v. Sullivan, 207 F.3d 379, 383 (7th Cir. 2000); American Family Mutual Insurance v. Roth, 2007 WL 2410074 at *2 (N.D.Ill. 2007)(collecting cases); McWilliams v. McWilliams, 2006 WL 3775952 (N.D.Ill. 2006)(collecting cases)

Arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief will not be considered. See Hodgdon v. Northwestern University, 245 F.R.D. 337, 340 n.3 (N.D. Ill. 2007)(collecting cases).

Cases that are published only on electronic databases such as Westlaw and Lexis must be attached as exhibits to the memorandum.

Exhibits must be legible. For example, copies of portions of a deposition transcript should be printed as full pages, not as mini-scripts or condensed versions.

The Court urges litigants to rely on cases that were decided in the same procedural posture. In memoranda supporting or opposing a motion to dismiss, cases that were decided on summary judgment (or on appeal of summary judgment) are not particularly helpful because of the differing standards. See, e.g., Winchester v. Ryder Integrated Logistics, Inc., No. 19-CV-01356-NJR, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148760, *6-7 (S.D. Ill. Aug. 18, 2020) (discussing what is required to state a claim under the FMLA versus what is required to prevail upon a claim under the FMLA); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 664 (2009) (“The question presented by a motion to dismiss for insufficient pleadings does not turn on the controls placed on the discovery process.”).  Indeed, the Court is on dangerous ground when it relies on summary judgment opinions when it is deciding motions to dismiss.  Kaminski v. Elite Staffing, Inc., No. 21-1616, at 5-6 (7th Cir. Jan. 19, 2022); Carlson v. CSX Transp., Inc., 758 F.3d 819, 827 (7th Cir. 2014). This applies to the inverse as well. See Lujan v. Nat’l Wildlife Fed’n, 497 U.S. 871, 889 (1990) (An opinion decided on a motion to dismiss “is of no relevance here, since it involved not a Rule 56 motion for summary judgment but a Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss on the pleadings. The latter, unlike the former, presumes that general allegations embrace those specific facts that are necessary to support the claim.”) (cleaned up).  As everybody hopefully learned in the first semester of law school, counsel should rely on decisions involving motions to dismiss when briefing a motion to dismiss and decisions involving motions for summary judgment (or Rule 50) when briefing a motion for summary judgment.