Saelee v. City of Richmond et al

Filing 24

ORDER re 23 Amended Document filed by Kaeian Saelee, 22 Amended Document filed by Kaeian Saelee. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 11/22/2010. (pjhlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/22/2010)

Saelee v. City of Richmond et al

Doc. 24

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. CITY OF RICHMOND, et al., Defendants. _______________________________/ The court is in receipt of a document entitled "Amendment to the Complaint (Doe 1)" and another document entitled "Amendment to Complaint (Doe 2)," by which plaintiff purports to amend the complaint to substitute two named defendants for defendants previously identified as "Doe 1" and "Doe 2." This is not an acceptable method for amending a complaint. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, a plaintiff may amend the complaint once as a matter of course within 21 days after serving it, or 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f). Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). In all other cases, a plaintiff may amend the complaint "only with the opposing party's written consent, or the court's leave." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Here, the original complaint was filed in Contra Costa Superior Court on May 15, 2010, and was removed to this court by defendant City of Richmond on May 27, 2010. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim on June 4, 2010, but later withdrew the motion after plaintiff agreed to dismiss one of the causes of action. Defendant answered the complaint on July 9, 2010. Because more than 21 days have passed since the filing of the answer, plaintiff cannot amend the complaint as of right, and must either KAEIAN SAELEE, Plaintiff, No. C 10-2331 PJH ORDER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

seek defendant's agreement in writing, or must file a motion for leave to amend the complaint. Moreover, the local rules of this court require that any party filing or moving to file an amended pleading "must reproduce the entire proposed pleading and may not incorporate any part of a prior pleading by reference." Civ. L.R. 10-1. Accordingly, any amended complaint (whether filed based on agreement of the defendant, or filed based on leave of court) must be complete in and of itself. It is not sufficient for plaintiff to "insert" an amendment into the original complaint.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 22, 2010 ______________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

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