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)

Download PDF
*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?