Commercial Litigation and Arbitration

Granting Rule 12(f) Motion to Strike a “Drastic Remedy” Disfavored by the Courts

From SAS Institute Inc. v. Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, LLP, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129611 (E.D.N.C. Nov. 9, 2011):

Rule 12(f) provides, in pertinent part that "[t]he court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter. The court may act ... on its own; or . . .on motion made by a party." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). The granting of such relief, however, has been long considered to be "a drastic remedy which is disfavored by the courts and infrequently granted." Palmer v. Oakland Farms, Inc. 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63265, 2010 WL 2605179 (W.D. Va. June 24, 2010). Rule 12(f) motions "are generally viewed with disfavor because striking a portion of a pleading is a drastic remedy and because it is often sought by the movant simply as a dilatory tactic." Waste Management Holdings, Inc. v. Gilmore, 252 F.3d 316, 347 (4th Cir. 2001).

Share this article:


Recent Posts