Witzke v. Marlan et al

Filing 44

ORDER GRANTING 30 Motion to Amend/Correct; GRANTING 40 Motion for Order--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
SCOTT A. WITZKE,
Case No. 2:16-cv-13753
District Judge Arthur J. Tarnow
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti

Plaintiff
v.
RUSS MARLAN and
ALEX J. SMITH,
Defendants.
___________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND /
SUPPLEMENT HIS COMPLAINT (DE 30) and PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE
MOTION TO SUBMIT SUCH MOTION WITHOUT HEARING (DE 40)
Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s September 20, 2017 motion for
leave to amend / supplement his complaint, by which Plaintiff seeks to add a party
defendant (Ebony M. Pullins-Govantes) and “to add to the substance of the
Complaint on the basis of events which occurred after the filing of the underlying
Complaint.” (DE 30 at 1-2.) His motion is accompanied by a brief in support (DE
30 at 3-9), as well as a proposed amended / supplemental complaint (DE 30 at 1025). Neither Defendant Marlan nor Defendant Smith has filed a response to this
motion; therefore, it is unopposed. Also before the Court is Plaintiff’s related
November 7, 2017 ex parte motion to submit such motion without hearing (DE
40).
1 

Upon consideration, each of these motions (DE 30, DE 40) is GRANTED.
No later than Monday, November 27, 2017, Plaintiff shall file his aforementioned
amended / supplemental complaint (DE 30 at 10-25), including the correction of
Ebony M. Pullins-Govantes’s title. (See DE 31 at 3 n.1). Once Plaintiff does so,
the Court will separately address Plaintiff’s request for service upon Defendant
Pullins-Govantes. (DE 29.) Notwithstanding this ruling, the hearing currently
scheduled for Friday, November 18, 2017 at 10:30 a.m. will go forward, at which
time the Court will hear oral argument on Plaintiff’s October 3, 2017 motion for
preliminary injunction (DE 31) and Plaintiff’s November 4, 2017 amended motion
for preliminary injunction (DE 38).1
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 14, 2017

s/Anthony P. Patti
Anthony P. Patti
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

The Court is aware of Defendants’ position that their “response to Plaintiff’s
motion for a preliminary injunction is due November 7, 2017[,]” and their
“response to Plaintiff’s motion to amend/correct his motion for a preliminary
injunction is due November 20, 2017.” (DE 39 ¶ 3.) Nonetheless, the motion
hearing can go forward. According to Plaintiff, the latter motion “should merely
be considered a ‘corrected’ filing with attached exhibits which were not attached to
the initial filing[,]” (DE 40 at 4 n.1), and Defendants filed their response on
November 7, 2017 (DE 41).
2 

Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record
on November 14, 2017, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail.
s/Michael Williams
Case Manager for the
Honorable Anthony P. Patti

3