Enjaian [E-Filer] v. Schlissel et al

Filing 17

AMENDED ORDER Denying 12 MOTION to Strike 11 Answer to Complaint, filed by Jesse R Enjaian [E-Filer]. Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

JESSE R. ENJAIAN,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 14-cv-13297

v.
MARK S. SCLISSEL, et al.,
Defendants.
/

AMENDED1 ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE ANSWER
Pending before the court is a Motion to Strike, in part, the Defendants’ Answer, filed
by Plaintiff on October 14, 2014. (Dkt. # 12.) However, that same day Plaintiff amended
his complaint as of right. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 (a)(1)(B). This rendered the original
Complaint—and by extension, the Answer—nullities.2 Drake v. City of Detroit, 266 F.
App’x 444, 448 (6th Cir. 2008). Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike, in part, the Defendants’ Answer
(Dkt. # 12) is DENIED AS MOOT.
s/Robert H. Cleland
ROBERT H. CLELAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: November 2, 2014
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record on
this date, November 2, 2014, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/Lisa Wagner
Case Manager and Deputy Clerk
[phone]

1

The original order incorrectly indicated the motion was filed by Defendants.

2

The court notes, however, that there was nothing improper about Defendants’
Answer and that another motion to strike directed at a similar Answer to the Amended
Complaint would likely be futile.
S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C2 ORDERS\14-13297.ENJAIAN.MotiontoStrike.ml.wpd