Roden v. Floyd et al
Filing
65
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 59 Motion to Amend/Correct AND DIRECTING SERVICE BY THE US MARSHAL, AND SETTING DEADLINE--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JONATHAN RODEN,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 2:16-CV-11208
District Judge Victoria A. Roberts
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti
MICHELLE FLOYD, and
RICHARD CADY,
Defendants.
___________________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED
MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT (DE 59), (2) DIRECTING
IMMEDIATE SERVICE BY THE U.S. MARSHAL, AND (3) SETTING
DEADLING FOR AMENDMENT OF THE PLEADINGS
This matter is before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff Jonathan
Roden’s unopposed motion to file an amended complaint. (DE 59.) For the
reasons that follow, Plaintiff’s Motion is GRANTED.
I.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without the assistance of counsel, filed
his complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis in the Western District
of Michigan on April 4, 2016. (DE 1.) The Court granted his application on the
same day and transferred the case to this District. (DEs 3, 4.) Plaintiff asserted
claims for retaliation under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United
1
States Constitution against three defendants, Michelle Floyd, Richard Cady and
Beverly Haynes-Love, alleging that they transferred him from G. Robert Cotton
Correctional Facility (JCF) to a more restrictive correctional facility and removed
him from Jackson College classes because of grievances he filed regarding the
education program and treatment of students. (DE 1.)
On March 15, 2018, the Court entered an Opinion and Order, adopting my
Report and Recommendation, and granting in part and denying in part Defendants’
motion for summary judgment. (DEs 52, 57.) Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant
Haynes-Love were dismissed with prejudice, and his claims against Defendants
Floyd and Cady are to proceed to trial. (Id.)
On May 7, 2018, Plaintiff filed the instant motion to amend the complaint, in
which he seeks to add two defendants, Shawn Brewer, Warden at JCF, and James
Roth, Inspector at JCF, and to add an additional cause of action against all
Defendants for “violation of the United States Constitution Eighth and Fourteenth
Amendments and Michigan common law by civil conspiracy through concerted
actions, manufacturing a false sexual harassment allegation.” (DE 59.)
Defendants did not file a response in opposition to Plaintiff’s motion.
II.
STANDARD
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), a party may amend its
pleadings at this stage of the proceedings only after obtaining leave of court. The
2
Rule provides that the Court should freely give leave for a party to amend its
pleading “when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). “Nevertheless, leave
to amend ‘should be denied if the amendment is brought in bad faith, for dilatory
purposes, results in undue delay or prejudice to the opposing party, or would be
futile.”’ Carson v. U.S. Office of Special Counsel, 663 F.3d 487, 495 (6th Cir.
2011) (quoting Crawford v. Roane, 53 F.3d 750, 753 (6th Cir. 1995)).
In addition, the Local Rules of the Eastern District of Michigan require a
party moving to amend a pleading to “attach the proposed amended pleading to the
motion.” E.D. Mich. LR 15.1. Any amendment to a pleading must “reproduce the
entire pleading as amended, and may not incorporate any prior pleading by
reference.” Id.
III.
ANALYSIS
The Court concludes that, under the liberal amendment standard outlined in
Rule 15(a)(2), Plaintiff is entitled to amend his Complaint. There is no indication
that the amendment was brought in bad faith or for dilatory purposes. Nor does it
appear to be prejudicial to the remaining defendants, who have chosen not to
respond in opposition to the motion. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion (DE 59) is
GRANTED.
In addition, Plaintiff has followed the requirements outlined in the Local
Rules to “attach the proposed amended pleading to the motion.” E.D. Mich. LR
3
15.1. (See DE 59 at Page ID 1047-1058.) Because Plaintiff is incarcerated and
proceeding pro se, the Court will not require Plaintiff to re-file that amended
complaint, but instead will treat DE 59 at Page ID 1047-1058 as the Plaintiff’s
Amended Complaint.
Further, the U.S. Marshal is DIRECTED to immediately serve a summons
and copy of the Amended Complaint (DE 59 at Page ID 1047-1058), and a copy of
this Order, without prepayment of the costs of such service, upon:
1. Shawn Brewer, Warden, at G. Robert Cotton Correctional Facility (JCF),
3510 North Elm Street, Jackson, Michigan 49201; and
2. James Roth, Inspector, at G. Robert Cotton Correctional Facility (JCF),
3510 North Elm Street, Jackson, Michigan 49201
The Marshal may collect the usual and customary costs from Plaintiff after
effecting service.
Finally, in light of the age of this case and the stage of the proceedings, the
Court will further ORDER that the deadline for any party to seek leave to amend
the pleadings is Friday, September 28, 2018.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: September 5, 2018
s/Anthony P. Patti
Anthony P. Patti
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record
on September 5, 2018, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail.
s/Michael Williams
Case Manager for the
Honorable Anthony P. Patti
(313) 234-5200
5
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?