Filed: Jun. 16, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 16, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING TIME IN WHICH TO ANSWER PLAINTIFF'S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . The parties respectfully request by Stipulation under L.R. 143 and 144 that the Court enter an Order setting the date of June 24, 2016, as the date on or before which Defendant United States of America must answer Plaintiff's third amended complaint, and relieving Defendant United States of America of its obligation to answer Plaintiff's second amended complaint. No extensions
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING TIME IN WHICH TO ANSWER PLAINTIFF'S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . The parties respectfully request by Stipulation under L.R. 143 and 144 that the Court enter an Order setting the date of June 24, 2016, as the date on or before which Defendant United States of America must answer Plaintiff's third amended complaint, and relieving Defendant United States of America of its obligation to answer Plaintiff's second amended complaint. No extensions ..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING TIME IN WHICH TO ANSWER PLAINTIFF'S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
The parties respectfully request by Stipulation under L.R. 143 and 144 that the Court enter an Order setting the date of June 24, 2016, as the date on or before which Defendant United States of America must answer Plaintiff's third amended complaint, and relieving Defendant United States of America of its obligation to answer Plaintiff's second amended complaint. No extensions of time have been requested or granted with respect to Defendant United States of America's answer to Plaintiff's third amended complaint.
On May 3, 2016, Plaintiff moved the Court for leave to amend his pleadings under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 and attached a copy of the proposed third amended complaint to his motion. The motion is set for hearing on June 28, 2016. On June 8, 2016, Defendant United States of America filed its notice of non-opposition to Plaintiff's motion to amend, which it had previously advised Plaintiff it would oppose. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of California, do not clearly provide a time in which to answer Plaintiff's third amended complaint under the circumstances.
Additionally, the Court denied Defendant United States of America's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's second amended complaint on June 3, 2016. Defendant United States of America is technically required to answer the second amended complaint on June 17, 2016. In light of the fact that Plaintiff wishes to supersede it with his third amended complaint, and Defendant does not oppose Plaintiff's request for leave to do so, the parties agree it would be more efficient for Defendant United States of America to answer the third amended complaint on or before June 24, 2016, with no requirement that it answer the second amended complaint.
SO STIPULATED:
ORDER
The foregoing stipulation is approved. Defendant United States of America shall file its answer to Plaintiff's third amended complaint on or before June 24, 2016, and is not required to answer Plaintiff's second amended complaint, which the third amended complaint supersedes.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
