Andrea Jarreau-Griffin, et al v. City of Vallejo, et al

Filing 30

ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 11/5/13 ORDERING that defendants' 23 motion for judgment on the pleadings is denied without prejudice; and plaintiffs' 28 ex parte application for an extension of time is denied as moot. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ANDREA JARREAU-GRIFFIN, et al.,

12

Plaintiffs,

13
14

2:12-CV-2979 KJM KJN

v.

ORDER

CITY OF VALLEJO, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Pending before the court is defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings,

17
18

which the court ordered submitted without argument. After considering the motion and the

19

docket in this case, the court DENIES the motion without prejudice.
Under Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a motion for judgment

20
21

on the pleadings may be filed “[a]fter the pleadings are closed---but early enough not to delay

22

trial . . . .” The pleadings are closed once a complaint and an answer have been filed, assuming

23

there is no counterclaim or cross-claim. Doe v. United States, 419 F.3d 1058, 1061 (9th Cir.

24

2005). A motion under Rule 12(c) filed before an answer is filed is “procedurally premature” and

25

should be denied. Id. The docket in this case reflects that neither defendant has filed an answer.

26

/////

27

/////

28

/////
1

1

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

2

1. Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings, ECF No. 23, is denied

3

without prejudice; and

4

2. Plaintiffs’ ex parte application for an extension of time, ECF No. 28, is denied

5

as moot.

6

DATED: November 5, 2013.

7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2