Verhines

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 ANDREW VERHINES, Case No. 1:24-cv-01111-KES-EPG Plaintiff, v. ORDER REGARDING SURREPLY SHIRLEY N. WEBER, (ECF No. 21) Defendant. 15 This civil action concerns a challenge to California’s election procedures, and Defendant filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint on January 6, 2025. (ECF No. 14). Plaintiff filed an opposition on January 16, 2025, and Defendant filed a reply on January 27, 2025. (ECF Nos. 18, 20). The assigned District Judge has referred the motion to the undersigned. (ECF No. 17). 19 After the reply was filed, Plaintiff filed a “second opposition,” 22 pages in total, to the 20 motion to dismiss on January 31, 2025. (ECF No. 21). However, Plaintiff is advised that his filing 21 is actually a surreply, which is not normally permitted. Thomas v. Wilkinson, No. 1:15-CV- 22 00527-LJO-GSA (PC), 2017 WL 262062, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 18, 2017) (“A surreply, or sur- 23 reply, is an additional reply to a motion filed after…