Stebbins v. Polano
- Jeffrey White
- 4:21-cv-04184
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Stebbins v. Polano, Judge White denied Stebbins’s emergency motion to strike Alphabet and YouTube’s motion to intervene.
David A. Stebbins’s motion was denied. Alphabet Inc. and YouTube LLC’s motion to intervene was not struck, and Stebbins was warned about possible future restrictions on filings.
What happened
In Stebbins v. Polano, David A. Stebbins asked the court to strike Alphabet Inc. and YouTube LLC’s motion to intervene in the case.
The court denied Stebbins’s motion. It explained that a motion to intervene is not a pleading that can be challenged under the rule governing motions to strike, and that the motion was not improper in any event. The court said Stebbins could make his arguments in a response to the intervention motion.
Judge Jeffrey White also warned Stebbins that continued filings violating court rules could lead to an order requiring him to explain why he should not be declared a vexatious litigant and subjected to a pre-filing order.
The detailed version
- Stebbins v. Polano · No. 4:21-cv-04184
- Jeffrey White
- Apr. 27, 2022
Background
David A. Stebbins filed what he called an emergency motion to strike Alphabet Inc. and YouTube LLC’s motion to intervene. The court characterized Stebbins’s filing as a challenge to the legal sufficiency of the intervention motion.
Ruling
The court denied Stebbins’s motion. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) permits a court to strike an insufficient defense or material that is redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous. Rule 7(a) identifies the documents that qualify as pleadings. The court held that a motion to intervene is not a pleading and therefore cannot be challenged through a motion to strike. The court added that, even if Rule 12(f) applied, the intervention motion was not redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous.
The court stated that Stebbins could raise his arguments in his response to the motion to intervene. It also criticized his repeated filings for failing to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the local rules. The court warned that continued abuse of the judicial process could result in an order requiring Stebbins to show why he should not be declared a vexatious litigant subject to a pre-filing order.
Disposition
Judge Jeffrey White denied the emergency motion to strike. The opinion does not state the court’s disposition of Alphabet Inc. and YouTube LLC’s motion to intervene.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.