BARBIERI v. AURORA LOAN SERVICES, LLC et al
Filing
48
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 8/4/11. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/4/2011)
*E-Filed 8/4/11*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
8
12
RONALD JAMES BARBIERI,
13
14
15
Plaintiff,
v.
No. C 10-4044 RS
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST TO FILE SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT
AURORA LOAN SERVICES, et al.,
16
17
Defendants.
____________________________________/
18
In a letter sent directly to the Court on July 29, 2011, pro se plaintiff Ronald Barbieri advised
19
the Court that he wishes to modify the First Amended Complaint (filed on July 20, 2011) by filing a
20
Second Amended Complaint. Ordinarily, Barbieri would need to either obtain a stipulation with the
21
defendant or formally move to amend his complaint. To avoid further delay and because leave to
22
amend is “freely given,” Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962), however, Barbieri’s request to
23
file a Second Amended Complaint is hereby granted. He must file the Second Amended Complaint
24
by August 12, 2011.
25
26
27
IT IS SO ORDERED.
28
NO. C 10-4044 RS
ORDER
1
2
Dated: 8/4/11
RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
NO. C 10-4044 RS
ORDER
28
2
1
2
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT A HARD COPY OF THIS ORDER WAS MAILED TO:
3
4
5
6
7
Ronald James Barbieri
120 Stony Point Road
Suite 140
Santa Rosa, CA 95401
8
9
11
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
10
DATED: 8/4/11
/s/ Chambers Staff
Chambers of Judge Richard Seeborg
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
NO. C 10-4044 RS
ORDER
28
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?