Bhatnagar v. United States of America

Filing 53

ORDER REOPENING CASE. Plaintiff shall file his Second Amended Complaint by 6/4/2015. Case Management Statement due by 7/16/2015. Case Management Conference set for 7/23/2015 10:00 AM. Signed by Judge Maria-Elena James on 6/1/2015. (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/1/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 SANJAY BHATNAGAR, Case No. 14-cv-00327-MEJ Plaintiff, 8 ORDER RE: MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT AND/OR FOR RECONSIDERATION v. 9 10 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Re: Dkt. No. 48 Defendant. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 On May 19, 2015, the Court dismissed this case, finding that Plaintiff’s claims were 14 untimely. Dkt. No. 46. Now pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend 15 and/or for Reconsideration. Dkt. No. 48. Although Defendant has not had the opportunity to 16 respond to Plaintiff’s Motion, the Court notes that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 provides 17 that the Court “should freely give leave [to amend] when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 18 15(a)(2). Plaintiff’s proposed Second Amended Complaint contains additional facts and evidence 19 that address the deficiencies noted in the Court’s May 19 Order. Plaintiff admits he had access to 20 these facts when he filed the earlier complaints, but he was proceeding pro se at that time and 21 contends he did not recognize the legal importance of the earlier efforts to submit his 22 administrative tort claim. He also states that he did not include this evidence in opposition to the 23 Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss because, under Rule 12(b)(6), it would have been improper for 24 the Court to consider evidence beyond the pleadings. 25 Without addressing the merits of Plaintiff’s arguments in support of his motion, the Court 26 makes a preliminary finding that he may be able to proceed on his claims. Thus, rather than have 27 the parties fully brief the matter as part of a motion for reconsideration, the Court shall permit 28 Plaintiff to file his proposed amended complaint. Accordingly, the Court hereby REOPENS this 1 case. Plaintiff shall file his Second Amended Complaint by June 4, 2015. Defendant shall file its 2 responsive pleading by June 25, 2015. 3 If Defendant files an answer, the Court shall conduct a Case Management Conference on 4 July 23, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom B, 15th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, 5 CA 94102. This conference shall be attended by lead trial counsel for parties who are represented. 6 No later than seven calendar days before the Case Management Conference, the parties shall file a 7 Joint Case Management Statement containing the information in the Standing Order for All 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 Judges in the Northern District of California, available at: The Joint Case Management Statement form may be obtained at: If Defendant files a motion instead of an answer, the Case Management Conference shall be vacated pending resolution of Defendant’s motion. IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 15 16 Dated: June 1, 2015 ______________________________________ MARIA-ELENA JAMES United States Magistrate Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?