Hand v. CenturyLink

Filing 16

MINUTE ORDER; Plaintiff's 15 Motion to Amend Caption is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the caption of the case shall be amended to identifyDefendant as CenturyLink, Inc., by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 11/3/15.(morti, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 15-cv-01379-KLM JUSTINA A, HAND, Plaintiff, v. CENTURYLINK, INC., as Sponsor and Administrator of the CenturyLink Employee Benefit Plan, Defendant. _____________________________________________________________________ MINUTE ORDER _____________________________________________________________________ ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Case Caption [#15]1 (the “Motion”). Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint [#7] named “CenturyLink” as the Defendant in the caption, but identified the party as “Defendant CenturyLink, Inc.” throughout the First Amended Complaint. Compare First Am. Compl. [#7] at 1 with id. ¶¶ 2-3, 6, 8. Defendant’s Answer identified Defendant as “CenturyLink, Inc.” Answer [#13] ¶ 1. In the Motion, which is unopposed, Plaintiff asks the Court to correct the caption to reflect that the name of Defendant is CenturyLink, Inc. It is clear from the pleadings that omission of the corporate designation of Defendant in the caption of the First Amended Complaint was a typographical error. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#15] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the caption of the case shall be amended to identify Defendant as CenturyLink, Inc., as is indicated above. Dated: November 3, 2015 1 “[#15]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the Court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this Minute Order.

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?