Burton v. Century Park Associates LLC

Filing 54

MINUTE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 7/29/14. Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint 51 is DENIED without prejudice.(lgale)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 13-cv-01798-WJM-KLM
KELSIE BURTON,
Plaintiff,
v.
CENTURY PARK ASSOCIATES LLC,
Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________
MINUTE ORDER
_____________________________________________________________________
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend
Complaint [#51] (the “Motion”).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#51] is DENIED without prejudice.
First, Plaintiff has failed to comply with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(a), which provides as
follows:
Before filing a motion, counsel for the moving party or an unrepresented
party shall confer or make reasonable good faith efforts to confer with any
opposing counsel or unrepresented party to resolve any disputed matter.
The moving party shall describe in the motion, or in a certificate attached to
the motion, the specific efforts to fulfill this duty.
The Motion may be denied on this basis alone.
Second, Plaintiff asserts that Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B) permits her to file an
amended complaint as a matter of course. This is incorrect. Rule 15(a)(1)(B) allows a
party to “amend its pleading once as a matter of course . . . if the pleading is one to which
a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days
after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Here, the
“earlier” triggering action in the case was the filing of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss [#18]
on October 7, 2013, not the filing of Defendant’s Answer [#48] on July 7, 2014.
Dated: July 29, 2014