IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY MARYLAND BRETT KIMBERLIN, Plaintiff, v. No, 403868V NATIONAL BLOGGERS CLUB, et al Defendants. MOTION TO STIKE DEFENDANT WALKER'S MOTION TO DISMISS, MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO ANTI-SLAPP HEARING Now comes Plaintiff Brett Kimberlin and moves this Court to strike Defendant Walker's Motion to Dismiss (DK 105), Motion for Summary Judgment (DK 112), and Motion for Anti-Slapp Hearing (DK 113) because they violate this Court’s order limiting Motion to Dismiss to 15 pages. 1. This Court admonished Defendant Walker on September 7, 2015 not to file any motion that exceeded 15 pages, and it struck his 46-page motion to dismiss. Defendant then filed a second Motion to Dismiss, which also exceeded the page limit and he filed a Motion to Exceed Page Limit. (DK 106). He then filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, which added arguments and exhibits that he had to delete from his original Motion to Dismiss. And finally, he filed an anti-slapp motion that was also in his original Motion To Dismiss, even though this Court already ruled that anti-slapp does not apply to this case. 2. Allinall, Defendant Walker merely broke his original Motion to Dismiss into three separate motions that exceed well over 100 pages with exhibits. He named one a Motion for Summary Judgment even though that is not ripe, and he named the other Motion for Hearing on Anti-Slapp even though that has already been rejected after a hearing. This makes a mockery of the Court's order of September 7, 2015.3. Defendant believes that he can do whatever he wants in this Court even if it violates this Court's orders. 4. Defendant's motions are voluminous, convoluted, meritless and frankly simply meant to harass. Wherefore, for these reasons, Plaintiff moves this Court to strike Defendant's ‘Walker's Motions as stated above. Respectfully submitted, Brett Kimberlin Certificate of Service Tcertify that I mailed a copy of this Motion to Defendant Walker this 20% day of October, 2015 Brett Kimberlin