United States District Court, D. Nevada
For Issac Avendano, Rolando Duenas, Plaintiffs: John A Tucker, LEAD ATTORNEY, Rachel R. Baldridge, John A. Tucker Co., L.P.A., Alliance, OH; Ian E Silverberg, Reno, NV.
For Security Consultants Group, Inc., Paragon Systems, Inc., Securitas Security Services USA, Inc., Defendants: Tara A Shiroff, LEAD ATTORNEY, Lewis Brisbois, Las Vegas, NV; Cayla Witty, Margaret G Foley, Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, Las Vegas, NV.
For United Government Security Officers of America, International Union, United Government Security Officers of America, Local 283, Defendants: Robert Kapitan, LEAD ATTORNEY, United Government Security Officers of America, Westminister, CO; Michael E. Langton, Law Office of Michael E. Langton, Reno, NV.
Valerie P. Cooke, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Before the court is plaintiffs' motion to strike (#114) union defendants' show cause and supplemental briefs (#s 109 and 110). Union defendants filed these briefs as required by the court's order to show cause (#105). Union defendants timely opposed the motion to strike (#117), and plaintiffs replied (#119). This order follows.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
This case concerns the employment of plaintiffs Isaac Avendano and Rolando Duenas (" plaintiffs") as federal building security officers, and various federal and state law claims arising therefrom against their employer (" corporate defendants") and union (" union defendants").
On September 12, 2014, the court entered a show cause order against union defendants and their counsel, Robert B. Kapitan (" Kapitan") for a collection of misrepresentations Kapitan made at a January 10, 2014 hearing (#105) regarding the status of a complaint before the Disciplinary Counsel of the Ohio Supreme Court (" ODC") against plaintiffs' counsel, John. A Tucker Co., LPA (" Tucker"). Therein, the court excerpted Kapitan's statements, and ordered:
1. Within twenty-one days (21) of the date of this order, counsel for union defendants Robert B. Kapitan SHALL FILE a brief to show cause why he and/or union defendants should not be sanctioned pursuant to this court's inherent power for knowingly making repeated misrepresentations to this court.
2. Plaintiffs shall file their response, if any, within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of union defendants' brief.
3. All factual assertions in either brief shall be supported by affidavit or other authenticated exhibits.
(#105 at 5). Union defendants timely filed a show cause brief on October 3, 2014 (#109) and a supplemental brief on October 16 (#110). Plaintiffs timely responded on October 20 (#113).
Three days later, on October 23, 2014, plaintiffs moved to strike the briefs for their purported immateriality and/or non-compliance with the show cause order. The court has yet to issue a decision on sanctions. However, the court first considers the motion to strike as it may necessarily ...