(a)     Nondispositive Motions.  Unless otherwise ordered by the District Judge or Magistrate Judge, all nondispositive motions, including but not limited to discovery, third-party practice, intervention or amendment of pleading, shall be heard by the Magistrate Judge to whom the matter is assigned. A hearing date must be secured before filing motion papers. Hearings may be scheduled by contacting the calendar clerk of the appropriate Magistrate Judge. After securing a hearing date, the parties may jointly request to have the hearing eliminated. If the Court approves the request or sua sponte cancels the hearing, all subsequently-filed motion papers must be served as if the hearing date were still in effect, and the motion will be considered submitted as of the original hearing date.

 

(1)    Moving Party; Supporting Documents; Time Limits.  No motion shall be heard by a Magistrate Judge unless the moving party files and serves the following documents at least 14 days prior to hearing:

 

(A)  Notice of Hearing

(B)  Motion

(C)  Memorandum of Law

(D)  Affidavits and Exhibits

(E)  Proposed Order*

 

Affidavits and exhibits shall not be attached to the memorandum of law, but shall be filed separately. Exhibits filed without a corresponding affidavit must contain a separate title page.

 

Reply briefs are not permitted to be filed in support of non-dispositive motions, except by prior permission of the Court.

 

(2)   Responding Party; Supporting Documents; Time Limits.  Any party responding to the motion shall file and serve the following documents at least 7 days prior to the hearing:

 

(A)  Memorandum of Law

(B)  Affidavits and Exhibits

 

Affidavits and exhibits shall not be attached to the memorandum of law, but shall be filed separately. Exhibits filed without a corresponding affidavit must contain a separate title page.

 

(b)     Dispositive Motions. Unless otherwise ordered by the District Judge, dispositive motions in any civil case shall be heard by the District Judge to whom the case is assigned. A hearing date must be secured before filing motion papers. Hearings may be scheduled by contacting the calendar clerk of the appropriate District Judge.  After securing a hearing date, the parties may jointly request to have the hearing eliminated. If the Court approves the request or sua sponte cancels the hearing, all subsequently-filed motion papers must be served as if the hearing date were still in effect, and the motion will be considered submitted as of the original hearing date. For the purposes of this Rule, motions for injunctive relief, judgment on the pleadings, summary judgment, to dismiss, to certify a class action and to exclude expert testimony under Daubert and Fed. R. Evid. 702 are considered dispositive motions.

 

(1)   Moving Party; Supporting Documents; Time Limits.  No motion shall be heard by a District Judge unless the moving party files and serves the following documents at least 42 days prior to the hearing:

 

(A)  Notice of Hearing

(B)  Motion

(C)  Memorandum of Law

(D)  Affidavits and Exhibits

(E)  Proposed Order*

 

(2)   Responding Party; Supporting Documents; Time Limits.  Any party responding to the motion shall file and serve the following documents at least 21 days prior to the hearing:

           

(A)  Memorandum of Law

(B)  Affidavits and Exhibits

 

(3)   Reply Memorandum.  The moving party may submit a reply memorandum of law by filing and serving such memorandum at least 14 days prior to the hearing. A reply memorandum may not raise new grounds for relief or present matters that do not relate to the response.

 

(4)   Multiple Summary Judgment Motions.  Multiple motions for summary judgment (or partial summary judgment) filed by a single party at or about the same time will be considered as a single motion for purposes of LR 7.1(d).

 

*Refer to the Electronic Case Filing Procedures and the Orders section for information on providing the court with proposed orders.

 

(c)     Post-trial and Post-judgment Motions. Post-trial and post-judgment motions that are filed within the applicable time periods set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure may be made to the District or Magistrate Judge before whom the case was heard. Hearings may be scheduled by contacting the calendar clerk of the appropriate Judge. The briefing schedule of LR 7.1(b) shall govern post-trial and post-judgment motions.

 

(d)      Length of Memoranda of Law; Certification of Compliance.  No party shall file a memorandum of law exceeding 12,000 words, or, if it uses a monospaced face, 1,100 lines of text, except by prior permission of the Court.  If a reply memorandum of law is filed, the cumulative total of the original memorandum and the reply memorandum shall not exceed 12,000 words, or, if they use a monospaced face, 1,100 lines of text, except by permission of the Court.  All text, including headings, footnotes, and quotations, count toward the word and line limitation.  The caption designation required by LR 5.2, the signature text, and any certificates of counsel do not count toward the limitation. Any requests to expand these limits, and any responses to such requests, shall be made by letter to the Court of no more than two pages in length, filed and served in accordance with the ECF procedures.

 

A memorandum of law submitted under LR 7.1(a) or 7.1(b) must include a certificate by the attorney, or an unrepresented party, that the memorandum complies with the length limitation of this rule and with the type size limitation of LR 7.1(f).  The certificate must state either the number of words or the number of lines of monospaced type in the memorandum.  If a reply memorandum of law is filed, the certificate included with the reply memorandum shall designate the cumulative total of words or lines of the two memoranda.  The person preparing the certificate may rely on the word or line count of the word processing program used to prepare the memorandum only if the preparer certifies that the word or line count of the word processing program has been applied specifically to include all text, including headings, footnotes, and quotations.  The certificate of compliance must also include the name and version of the word processing software used to prepare the memorandum.

 

(e)     Failure to Comply.  In the event a party fails to timely deliver and serve a memorandum of law, the Court may strike the hearing from its motion calendar, continue the hearing, refuse to permit oral argument by the party not filing the required statement, consider the matter submitted without oral argument, allow reasonable attorney's fees, or proceed in such other manner as the Court deems appropriate.

 

(f)     Type Size. Memoranda of law filed by a represented party shall be typewritten and double-spaced.  Quotations more than two lines long may be indented and single-spaced. Headings and footnotes may be single-spaced.  All text, including footnotes, must appear in at least font size 13 based on the designation of the word processing program used to prepare the memorandum.  Pages shall be 8 ½ by 11 inches in size, and no text may appear beyond the page area of 6 ½ by 9 inches, except that page numbers may be placed in the margins.

 

Memoranda of law filed by a party pro se shall be typewritten and double-spaced or, if handwritten, shall be printed legibly.   

 

(g)      Unsolicited Memoranda of Law.  Except with permission of the Court, no memoranda of law will be allowed except as provided in these rules.

 

(h)     Motion to Reconsider. Motions to reconsider are prohibited except by express permission of the Court, which will be granted only upon a showing of compelling circumstances.   Requests to make such a motion, and responses to such requests, shall be made by letter to the Court of no more than two pages in length, which shall be filed and served in accordance with the ECF procedures.

 

(i)     Citing Judicial Dispositions. A party should file and serve a copy of any judicial opinion, order, judgment, or disposition with the brief or other paper in which it is cited, only to the extent that it is not available in a publicly accessible electronic database.

 

[Adopted effective February 1, 1991; amended November 1, 1996; amended January 3, 2000; amended January 1, 2004; amended May 17, 2004; amended May 16, 2005; amended September 24, 2009; amended December 1, 2009]

 

2009 Advisory Committee’s Note to LR 7.1

A number of noteworthy changes have been made to Local Rule 7.1. Generally, the changes were intended to clarify uncertainties or gaps in the rules. The most significant changes and clarifications include the following:

1. Parties are required to secure a hearing date before filing any motion papers. LR 7.1(a) and (b).

 

2. A mechanism is provided to compute the briefing and submission schedules if the motion ultimately is submitted without a hearing. LR 7.1(a) and (b).

 

3. The rule makes explicit that motions to exclude expert testimony under Daubert and Fed. R. Evid. 702 are treated as dispositive motions. LR 7.1(b).

 

4. A reply brief generally is not permitted in connection with non-dispositive motions, LR 7.1(a)(1), and, with respect to dispositive motions, a reply brief must not raise new issues or go beyond the issues raised in the response brief to which it replies. LR 7.1(b)(3).

 

5. A new subdivision has been added to make it clear that a single word limit applies whether a party files a single summary judgment motion (or motion for partial summary judgment) or several such motions at or about the same time. LR 7.1(b)(4).

 

6. Requests to enlarge word limits must be made in writing — and permission must be obtained — before filing a brief exceeding the word limit. LR 7.1(d).

 

7. The Court has access to commercial databases maintained by legal research services, as well as to databases maintained by courts; parties need not attach unpublished opinions to briefs if those opinions are available on a publicly-accessible electronic database. LR 7.1(i).

 

8. A new subdivision governing post-trial and post-judgment motions has been added. LR 7.1(c).

The amended rule also includes additional clarifying language about how to calculate certain deadlines and about the Court’s ECF procedures.

 

2004 Advisory Committee’s Note to LR 7.1(b)

Rule 7.1(b) was amended effective January 1, 2004, to set forth the District Judges’ requirements for dispositive motions.  This amendment replaced the “fully briefed motion” practice that previously had been in effect.

 

1999 Advisory Committee’s Note to LR 7.1(b)(2)

 

Supporting Affidavits.  Rule 7.1(b)(2) specifically contemplates that the factual basis for a dispositive motion will be established with affidavits and exhibits served and filed in conjunction with the initial motion and the responding party’s memorandum of law.  Although the rule makes provision for a Reply Memorandum, it neither permits nor prohibits the moving party from filing affidavits or other factual material therewith.  The rule contemplates that the discovery record will allow the initial summary judgment submission to anticipate and address the responding party’s factual claims.  Reply affidavits are appropriate only when necessary to address factual claims of the responding party that were not reasonably anticipated.  It is improper to withhold information - either from discovery or from initial moving papers - in order to gain an advantage.

 

1996 Advisory Committee's Note to LR 7.1

 

LR 7.1(b) was amended to specify the motions considered to be dispositive motions under this rule.  The motions considered dispositive motions under this rule are the matters that, under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B), may be heard by a Magistrate Judge only for the purpose of making proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition.

 

1996 Advisory Committee’s Note to LR 7.1(b)(2)

 

The new Local Rules significantly change procedures governing motion practice.  They are patterned after procedures adopted by several judges on an experimental basis.

 

These reforms reflect the spirit of the 1993 Amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  In particular, they enable counsel to structure motion deadlines to accommodate the differing demands of diverse cases.  These rules also minimize Court involvement in the process until dispositive motions have been fully briefed and are ready for hearing.  The exchange of briefs may narrow or resolve pending controversies without judicial intervention.  By so doing, the rules prevent the expenditure of judicial resources on the controversies which may have become moot at the time of the hearing.

 

The new rules prescribe deadlines that govern motion practice if counsel cannot agree on a briefing schedule.  The new rules also enlarge the briefing periods for briefs responding to motions and for reply briefs.  This revision is intended to reduce any unfair advantage favoring the moving party (who may have been preparing the motion for a much longer period than the opponent is afforded for reply).  The enlarged deadline for service of Reply Briefs reflects the Committee’s consensus that former deadlines often imposed time constraints which undermined the quality of the Reply.  These briefing deadlines involve “calendar days”, not “business days”.

 

1991 Advisory Committee's Note to LR 7.1

 

See LR 1.1(f) for the method of computing time.

 

See LR 37.2 for the form of discovery motions.