printing Print

The site you are about to visit contain(s) information created and maintained by other public and private organizations. These links are provided for the user’s convenience.

The U.S. District Court of Northern District of Illinois does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this outside information; nor does it control or guarantee the on-going availability, maintenance, or security of these internet sites.

Further, the inclusion of links is not intended to reflect their importance or to endorse any views expressed, or products or services offered, on these outside sites, or the organizations sponsoring the sites.

Motions to Strike

Motions to strike are strongly disfavored. See generally Custom Vehicles, Inc. v. Forest River, Inc., 464 F.3d 725, 727 (7th Cir. 2006) (Easterbrook, J., in chambers). They serve primarily as unauthorized vehicles for parties to expand the page limits for memoranda in support of their motions. The Court is capable of discerning if a new argument has been raised in a reply brief, or if a litigant has failed to comply with the requirements of Local Rule 56.1; such errors do not require supplemental motion practice. If a party believes that the other side's brief contains inaccurate facts or that the other side's Local Rule 56.1 statement (in summary-judgment briefing) contains an unsupported assertion, then the complaining party should so argue in the response or reply brief, or in the responsive 56.1 statement. Motions to strike that are not within the limited boundaries established by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) will be summarily denied.

Note: The court does not control nor can it guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of this information. Neither is it intended to endorse any view expressed nor reflect its importance by inclusion in this site.