Koenig v. Bank of America, N.A.

Filing 64

ORDER Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Leave File a First Amended Complaint(Doc. 57) - Plaintiff shall file his First Amended Complaint, amending his second and third causes of action, only, on or before April 8, 2015; no further extensions will be granted. ORDER Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Object to Magistrate's Orders (Doc. 58) - Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Objections to the Magistrates Order Denying Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Add New Defendants, Fact ual Allegations and Causes of Action is DENIED. ORDER Granting Plaintiff's Motion to Withdraw His Objections. (Doc. 62) Plaintiffs Motion to Withdraw Plaintiffs Objections to the Magistrates Order Denying Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Add N ew Defendants, Factual Allegations and Causes of Action (Doc. 56) is GRANTED. (Doc. 62). THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE. Failure to comply with this Order will result in a recommendation of dismissal of this case. signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 3/6/2015. (Herman, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
13

Case No. 1:13-cv-0693-AWI-BAM
PHILIP KOENIG,

14
15
16
17
18
19

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR LEAVE FILE A FIRST
AMENDED COMPLAINT
(Doc. 57)

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,
Defendant.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO OBJECT TO
MAGISTRATE’S ORDERS
(Doc. 58)

21

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO WITHDRAW HIS
OBJECTIONS.

22

(Doc. 62).

23

THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE

20

24
25

Plaintiff Philip A. Koenig (“Plaintiff”), is proceeding pro se, in this mortgage-related case

26

brought against Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“Defendant”). Plaintiff brings three motions

27

for the Court’s consideration stemming from the Court’s prior Order denying Plaintiff’s Motion

28

for Leave to Add New Parties and Claims to his complaint. (Doc. 54). After denying Plaintiff’s
1

1

Motion for Leave, the Court ORDERED Plaintiff to file his First Amended Complaint on or

2

before January 9, 2015.

3

In the instant Motions, Plaintiff requests leave to file objections to this Court’s December

4

10, 2014 Order denying Plaintiff’s Motion to add new claims and parties and permission to file

5

his First Amended Complaint following a ruling on Plaintiff’s objections. (Docs. 56, 57).1 For

6

the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to file objections is DENIED and

7

Plaintiff will have until April 8, 2015 to file an amended complaint which complies with the

8

Court’s previous order on dismissal. (Docs. 24, 54).

9

A party may serve and file objections to a Magistrate Judge’s non-dispositive pretrial

10

order within 14 days after being served with a copy. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). Plaintiff was served

11

by mail with the order denying his motion for leave to amend on December 10, 2014, and any

12

objections were due on or before December 28, 2014. Plaintiff’s request for an extension of time,

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

signed on January 9, 2015, is late, and Plaintiff has not explained why he was unable to request an
extension of time before the deadline to file his objections. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). Plaintiff’s
report that he intended to file his motion for leave with his earlier objections, filed on January 5,
2015 does not establish excusable neglect for the late request. Plaintiff’s strep throat also does
not constitute good cause for why Plaintiff could not request an extension of time to file his
objections. Plaintiff is familiar with the simple process of requesting a timely extension of time.
Indeed, Plaintiff’s instant Motion for leave is a fourth attempt to obtain additional time to respond
to a Court order. Plaintiff’s delay in this case has been ongoing and Plaintiff was previously
warned that the Court would not grant a further request for an extension of time unless good
cause is shown.
Plaintiff has not shown good cause to allow the late filed objections, but in an effort to be

23
particularly sensitive to the challenges faced by pro se litigants, the Court will grant a final
24
extension of time for Plaintiff to file his First Amended Complaint. The First Amended
25
///
26
27
28

1

Presumably in an effort to clarify the docket, on January 26, 2015, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Withdraw his
initial objections, filed on January 5, 2015 (Doc. 62), to the Magistrate Judge’s Order denying Plaintiff’s Motion for
Leave to Amend his Complaint.

2

1

Complaint must be consistent with the Court’s December 23, 2013 Order granting Plaintiff leave

2

to amend his second and third causes of action, only. (Doc. 24).

3

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

4

1.

Plaintiff’s Motion for an Extension of time to file the First Amended Complaint is

5

GRANTED. (Doc. 57).

6

amending his second and third causes of action, only, on or before April 8, 2015;

7

no further extensions will be granted;

8

2.

Causes of Action is DENIED;

10
3.

and Causes of Action (Doc. 56) is GRANTED. (Doc. 62).

13
4.

Failure to comply with this Order will result in a recommendation of dismissal of
this case.

15
16

Plaintiff’s Motion to Withdraw Plaintiff’s Objections to the Magistrate’s Order
Denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Add New Defendants, Factual Allegations

12

14

Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Objections to the Magistrate’s Order Denying
Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Add New Defendants, Factual Allegations and

9

11

Plaintiff shall file his First Amended Complaint,

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17
18

Dated:

/s/ Barbara

March 6, 2015

A. McAuliffe

_

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3