Paulsen v. Raemisch et al

Filing 22

MINUTE ORDER; Plaintiff's 21 Petition to Amend Parties to Case Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 is DENIED without prejudice, by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 7/21/15.(morti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya
Civil Action No. 15–cv–00800–KMT
MARK WALTER PAULSEN,
Plaintiff,
v.
PETER ANDERSON, Facility Monitor, Private Prison Monitoring Unit, CDOC,
DOUG ROBERTS, Medical Monitor Private Prison Monitoring Unit, CDOC,
JERRY STEELE, Private Prison Monitoring Service, CDOC,
DENNIS O’NEIL, Outpatient Clinical Supervisor, CDOC,
RICHARD MADRID, Drug and Alcohol/Addiction Services, KCCC,
PATRICIA HEADLEY, CAC III, Drug and Alcohol/Addiction Services, KCCC,
L. MORTIN-EARL, MA, CAC III, Drug and Alcohol/Addiction Services, KCCC,
DESIREE ANDREWS, Health Services Administrators, KCCC,
JODI GRAY, Health Services Administrators, KCCC,
KATHY M. WILEY, NP, Health Care Provider, KCCC,
KAREN C. MITCHELL, NP, Health Care Provider, KCCC,
DAVID R. GROSS, PA, Health Care Provider, KCCC, and
SUSAN M. TIONA, MD, Facility Physician, KCCC,
Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER
ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KATHLEEN M. TAFOYA
Plaintiff’s “Petition to Amend Parties to Case Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15”
(Doc. No. 21, filed July 20, 2015) is DENIED without prejudice. When seeking leave of court to
amend the pleadings, a motion to amend must detail the proposed amendments and the reasons
why such amendments are necessary. In addition, the plaintiff must attach a proposed amended
pleading to his motion. Without a proposed amended complaint, it is impossible for the court to
determine whether the proposed amendments are permissible.
Dated: July 21, 2015