Araiza v. Mecham

Filing 25

ORDER granting 20 Plaintiff's Motion to Amend/Correct. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 7/16/10.(DMT)

Araiza v. Mecham

Doc. 25

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Milton Kent Mecham doing business as ) ) Mecham & Associates, Chartered, ) ) Defendant. ) ) Alejandro Araiza,

No. CV10-0188 PHX DGC

ORDER

On June 17, 2010, Plaintiff Alejandro Araiza filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint (Doc. 20). Defendant Milton Kent Mecham d/b/a Mecham &

Associates, Chartered, did not file a response to the motion within the time period allowed by the Local Rules. See L.R. Civ. P. 7.2(c) ("The opposing party shall . . . have fourteen (14) days after service in a civil or criminal case within which to serve and file a responsive memorandum."). The Court will treat Plaintiff's lack of response as consent to the motion to amend pursuant to Rule 7.2(i) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. See L.R. Civ. P. 7.2(i) (stating that, if a party fails to "file the required answering memoranda," "such noncompliance may be deemed a consent to the denial or granting of the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily").

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to amend (Doc. 20) is granted. DATED this 16th day of July, 2010.

-2-