Coalition for ICANN Transparency, Inc. v. Verisign, Inc. et al

Filing 248

ORDER by Judge Whyte granting 230 Motion for Leave to File; denying 240 Motion to Amend/Correct (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2010)

Coalition for ICANN Transparency, Inc. v. Verisign, Inc. et al

Doc. 248

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT--No. CV 05-04826 RMW MEC

E-FILED on

12/16/2010

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

COALITION FOR ICANN TRANSPARENCY INC., Plaintiff, v. VERISIGN, INC., Defendants.

No. CV 05-04826

RMW

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT [Re Docket Nos. 230, 240]

On November 12, 2010, plaintiff Coalition for ICANN Transparency, Inc. filed a motion for leave to file a third amended complaint and setting the hearing for December 17, 2010. On November 30, 2010, defendant Verisign, Inc. filed notice of nonopposition to that motion. The original motion for leave to amend is therefore granted. On December 7, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a third amended complaint "nunc pro tunc." This motion seeks to add allegations concerning the financial supporters of plaintiff. Plaintiff purports to set the hearing for this motion on December 17, 2010. No application for shortening time has been filed, and no satisfactory explanation as why the application should be heard on a shortened schedule is offered. Nor may plaintiff add substantive allegations to its motion

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

"nunc pro tunc." Such orders are available to correct clerical or ministerial orders. See Singh v. Mukasey, 533 F.3d 1103, 1110 (9th Cir. 2008). Therefore, the most recent motion for leave to file a third amended complaint is taken off the calendar and denied without prejudice to being refiled with proper notice in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Northern District of California Civil Local Rules.

DATED:

12/16/2010

RONALD M. WHYTE United States District Judge

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT--No. CV 05-04826 RMW MEC 2