Rallos

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 LAWRENCE GEORGE HASH, No. 2:20-cv-1272 TLN AC P Plaintiff, v. ORDER T. RALLOS, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Currently before the court are plaintiff’s motions to strike, ECF Nos. 26, 27, motions to quash, ECF Nos. 28, 36, and motion for a ruling on the motion to quash, ECF No. 35.1 I. Motions to Strike Plaintiff has filed two motions to strike. The first seeks to strike defendants’ reply in support of their motion to revoke plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status, on the ground that defendants raised new arguments in their reply and that the reply is untimely. ECF No. 26. While a party is generally not permitted to raise new arguments in a reply brief, they are permitted to respond to points made by the opposing party’s response to their motion. ACLU of Nev. v. Las Vegas, 333 F.3d 1092, 1106 n.14 (9th Cir. 2003). …