Help! Would this be considered an underlying Motion to Strike Defenses

[delta1]

Plaintiff submitted "Reply to Defendant's Affirmative Defenses" very simple 2 paragraphs that state:

Plaintiff denies each and every affirmative defense contained therein and demands strict proof thereof.

Wherefore, plaintiff respectfully requests this honorable court deny the affirmative defenses and grant the relief requested by Plaintiff and such other relief as this Court deems reasonable and necesssary.

How can you request the court to deny affirmative defenses and grant relief? Federal and local rules (FRCP) have provisions for and allow a party to make a MTS defenses for insufficiency, being rudendant, etc.... I have yet to read anything about a request to deny. Wouldn't that require a ruling, which requires a hearing which requires a motion? It seems they are trying to sneak a MTS defenses through the back door.

I started to draft a response to this and want to know if I can use the theory of an underlying MTS. Something like:

Although the Plaintiff captioned the pleading as “Reply to Affirmative Defenses” it appears the Plaintiff is requesting this Honorable Court to “strike” the affirmative defenses; however, the Plaintiff failed to raise any argument concerning the relief sought.

Then move into case law about MTS etc...

Anyone??

[montanatim]

It also sounds like a back door attempt to get summary judgment.

[delta1]

That thought crossed my mind also, get the defenses striken and then go for a summary judgment. They can call it what they want, its a MTS defenses so...

They made a motion, I am objecting and requesting the Judge to deny the motion. "Defendant's Objections and Response To Plaintiff's Reply to Affimative Defenses"

The last sentence of the answer and defenses asks the Court to dismiss the case with prejudice or any other relief the court deems just and proper. That's probably why they answered the way they did.