Azad et al v. Tokio Marine HCC - Medical Insurance Services Group et al

Filing 88

Order by Hon. Phyllis J. Hamilton granting 87 Stipulation to Extend Time for Plaintiffs to File First Amended Complaint. (pjhlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/7/2017)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 MOHAMMED AZAD, et al., 6 7 8 Case No. 17-cv-00618-PJH Plaintiffs, 5 v. TOKIO MARINE HCC - MEDICAL INSURANCE SERVICES GROUP, et al., ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PLAINTIFFS TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPAINT Re: Dkt. No. 87 Defendants. 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 On July 14, 2017, the court granted the various motions to dismiss in this matter, 12 with leave to amend. Dkt. 86. The court ordered that “[p]laintiffs shall file an amended 13 complaint by August 7, 2017. No additional claims or parties may be added without leave 14 of court or stipulation of defendants.” Id. at 18. 15 Before the court is a stipulation to extend the deadline for plaintiffs to file an 16 amended complaint to August 21, 2017, with the response from defendants due 17 September 18, 2017. Dkt. 87. The court GRANTS the request to extend these 18 deadlines. 19 However, the stipulation notes that “due to the tentative settlement of the claims of 20 [the two named plaintiffs],” plaintiffs’ counsel intend to substitute “new Plaintiffs and 21 proposed Class Representatives.” The court’s prior order does not permit the addition of 22 new parties without consent of defendants or leave of court. Thus, if plaintiffs intend to 23 add or substitute new class representatives, they must either obtain the consent of the 24 defendants, or file a motion for leave of court by the deadline. 25 26 27 28 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 7, 2017 __________________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge

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?