Summary
This memorandum and order addresses a pro se plaintiff's motion to strike various docket entries based on alleged stylistic errors in how the parties' names are formatted. The court denies the motion, explaining that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) does not authorize striking pleadings for mere formatting preferences or lack of legal justification. The judge notes that capitalization differences carry no legal distinction and reaffirms that the defendant is being sued in his individual capacity regardless of the case caption.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the court should grant a motion to strike filings for alleged name‑styling mistakes under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f).
Holdings
- The motion to strike is denied because the alleged mistakes do not constitute redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter, and striking is a drastic remedy not warranted here.
Key quotations
“Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), a court may “strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.””
Factual background
Plaintiff Richard Pack, representing himself, sought to have the court strike docket entries that referred to him as “RICHARD PACK” and to Defendant as “OFFICER KEVIN JACKSON,” claiming these were mistakes. He offered no legal authority or factual justification for the requested striking.
Procedural history
Plaintiff, a pro se litigant, filed a motion to strike various docket filings alleging improper name styling. The district court considered the motion and denied it.