Lee et al v. Yang et al

Filing 43

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 1/30/13 ORDERING that the Second Amended complaint is STRIKEN, and Defendant's MOTION to DISMISS 36 is DENIED as MOOT. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

Nou Lee, Bor Pha,

10

Plaintiffs,

11
12
13
14
15
16

v.
Yia Yang, Yia Yang d.b.a. Yia’s
Auto Sales, Yia Yang d.b.a.
Platinum Financial, Yia’s Auto
Sales, Inc., Great American
Insurance Company,
Defendants.
________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:12-cv-01580-GEB-DAD
ORDER STRIKING SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT*

Defendant Great American Insurance Company (“Great American”)

17
18

moves for

an

order

that

would

dismiss

Plaintiffs’

Second

Amended

19

Complaint (“SAC”) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 41(b)

20

or, alternatively, that would strike any allegation in the SAC that

21

relates to Great American under Rule 12(f). (ECF No. 36.) Great American

22

argues the SAC should be dismissed since it was not filed within the

23

leave period granted in a dismissal order, and Plaintiffs did not obtain

24

Defendant’s consent to file the SAC.

25
26
27
28

*

This matter is deemed suitable for decision without oral
argument. E.D. Cal. R. 230(g).
1

1

The record reveals Plaintiffs were without authority to file

2

the Second Amended Complaint; therefore this complaint is stricken, and

3

Defendant’s motion is denied as moot.

4

Dated:

January 30, 2013

5
6
7

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
Senior United States District Judge

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2