NOT FOR PUBLICATION

LETTER OPINION & ORDER

MICHAEL A. SHIPP, District Judge.

Dear Counsel and Mr. Fraenkel:

This matter comes before the Court upon the parties' Correspondence to the Court. (See ECF Nos. 24-2, 26, 27.)

On September 24, 2018, the Court granted Plaintiff's Motion to Amend. (ECF No. 18.) On October 9, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Third Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 19.) On October 30, 2018, Defendants Christopher Bateman, Brian Glicos, and Janice Matthewson ("Individual Defendants") filed a Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 23.) On October 31, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Fourth Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 24.) On the same day, Plaintiff filed a Request for Summons to be issued for certain defendants. (ECF No. 25.) Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint was filed without written consent from the defendants. The State of New Jersey, the Attorney General of New Jersey, the New Jersey State Police, Colonel Joseph Fuentes, Trooper William Garcia, Trooper Matthew Erny, Detective Sergeant Robert Pavelchak, Investigator Mark Murranko, Captain Robert Price, Captain William Harkness, Detective Sergeant First Class David Bode, and Captain Christopher Nunziato ("State Defendants") have not responded to Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint or Fourth Amended Complaint.

Upon the Court's review, the Third Amended Complaint and Fourth Amended Complaint contain substantially the same allegations and the same causes of action. (Compare ECF No. 19 with ECF No. 24.) The two complaints, however, contain different exhibits. (Id.) The Fourth Amended Complaint includes correspondence indicating that Plaintiff mistakenly excluded certain documents from the Third Amended Complaint. (See Correspondence, ECF No. 24-2.) The Court interprets the correspondence as a request for leave to file an amended complaint, and the Court grants Plaintiff's request. The Fourth Amended Complaint (ECF No. 24), accordingly, shall serve as the operative complaint. Further, the Court terminates Individual Defendants' Motion to Dismiss.

By November 16, 2018, Individual Defendants and State Defendants shall file a joint proposed schedule to answer or respond to Plaintiff's Fourth Amended Complaint. Individual Defendants may request that the Court consider their previously filed Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 23) as their operative motion, in which case the Court will reinstate the motion and Plaintiff's opposition will be due by November 30, 2018.

Based on the foregoing, and for other good cause shown,

IT IS on this 9th day of November, 2018 ORDERED that: