Conkleton v. Zavaras et al
Filing
201
MINUTE ORDER denying 199 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 7/15/2011. (mehcd)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 08-cv-02612-WYD-MEH
JAMES K. CONKLETON,
Plaintiff,
v.
ED MURO, in his individual and official capacities as a Correctional Officer I for the CDOC, and
RICHARD DEGROOT, in his individual and official capacities as a Case Manager for the CDOC,
Defendants.
MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on July 15, 2011.
Because justice does not require amendment in this case, Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to
Amend the Complaint [filed July 14, 2011; docket #199] is denied. Plaintiff does not seek to add
any new claims, parties or factual allegations in this case;1 rather, Plaintiff’s stated reason for the
“amendment” is to clarify his current claims, because “through the course of pretrial proceedings
and procedures, this action no longer consist [sic] of Seven Claims for relief against (11) prison
officials.” Motion, ¶ 2. However, the Final Pretrial Order (docket #172), which is the operative
pleading in this matter, lists three claims against four defendants. Judge Daniel’s March 28, 2011
order simply dismisses two of those listed claims against two defendants, leaving two claims and
two defendants to proceed in this matter. See Order, docket #190. Plaintiff’s proposed Second
Amended Complaint does nothing to change the nature or structure of this case. The Plaintiff
articulates no reason, and the Court finds none, to justify filing an unnecessary pleading at this stage
of the litigation.
1
Accordingly, the motion does not seek dispositive relief and this Court need not issue a
recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).
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?