DECKERT v. TERRE HAUTE POLICE DEPARTMENT et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
TERRE HAUTE DIVISION
PHIL DECKERT, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 2:25-cv-00258-MPB-MJD
)
TERRE HAUTE POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT
AND SUA SPONTE STRIKING PLAINTIFF'S UNAUTHORIZED FILINGS
Pro se Plaintiff Phil Deckert moves for a more definite statement of Defendant's Answer
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(e). [Dkt. 87.] He argues that Defendant's Answer does
not adequately admit or deny all allegations in the Second Amended Complaint and that the
ambiguities in Defendant's Answer will impede his ability to litigate this case. [Id.]
Plaintiff's motion is DENIED. Rule 12(e) authorizes a motion for a more definite
statement of a pleading "to which a responsive pleading is allowed[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(e).
The Court has not authorized Plaintiff to reply to Defendant's Answer, which does not contain
any counterclaims. Thus, a responsive pleading to Defendant's Answer is not allowed, and
Plaintiff's motion for a more definite statement of Defendant's Answer under Rule 12(e) is
improper. See Fuerstenberg v. Milwaukee Area Technical College, 2019 WL 2022664, at *2
(E.D. Wis. May 8, 2019) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a)).
The Court notes that Plaintiff has already filed an unauthorized Reply and Brief in
Support of Reply to Defendant's Answer. [Dkts. 85; 86.] These unauthorized filings violate
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a), which provides an exhaustive list of the pleadings that are
Case 2:25-cv-00258-MPB-MJD Document 89 Filed 12/15/25 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

allowed in federal court. An unauthorized reply such as Plaintiff's may be stricken or
disregarded. Mareska v. North Judson-San Pierre School Corp., 1988 WL 492338, at *1 (N.D.
Ind. Dec. 5, 1988) (citing 2A J. Moore, W. Taggart & J. Wicker, Moore's Federal Practice and
Procedure ¶ 7.02 (2d ed. 1985)). Here, the Court finds that Plaintiff's unauthorized filings make
the record unclear, and the Court will strike rather than disregard them. Accordingly, Plaintiff's
unauthorized Reply and Brief in Support of Reply [Dkts. 85 & 86] are hereby STRICKEN.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: 15 DEC 2025
Distribution:
All ECF-registered counsel of record via email
PHIL DECKERT
1540 Spruce St.
Terre Haute, IN 47807
Case 2:25-cv-00258-MPB-MJD Document 89 Filed 12/15/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>