Rochester Laborers Pension Fund v. Monsanto Company et al

Filing 77

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. (see order for details) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint [# 74 ] is granted, and plaintiff's second amended class action complaint [# 75 -1] is deemed filed as of this date. IT IS F URTHER ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss [# 61 ] is denied as moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the agreed scheduling motion [# 76 ] is granted only as follows: defendants' motion to dismiss and supporting memorandum shall be filed as set out above by February 29, 2012. Plaintiff shall file any responsive memorandum by March 23, 2012, and any reply brief may be filed by April 6, 2012. ( Response to Court due by 2/29/2012.) Signed by Honorable Catherine D. Perry on 01/31/2012. (CBL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
ROCHESTER LABORERS
PENSION FUND, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly
situated,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MONSANTO COMPANY, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:10CV1380 CDP

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before me on plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint.
Defendants do not oppose amendment, so the motion will be granted. So that the
record is clear, however, defendants must not simply supplement the pending
motion to dismiss with materials relating to the new allegations. Instead, the
pending motion to dismiss will be denied as moot and a new motion to dismiss
addressing all allegations should be filed. I encourage the parties to use the same
exhibit numbers wherever possible, and if they do this, then the Court only
requires a courtesy copy of any new exhibits, together with the briefs. To provide
the parties with sufficient opportunity to comply with this Order, I will give the
parties more time than what was suggested in the proposed briefing schedule.

Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint
[#74] is granted, and plaintiff’s second amended class action complaint [#75-1] is
deemed filed as of this date.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants’ motion to dismiss [#61] is
denied as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the agreed scheduling motion [#76] is
granted only as follows: defendants’ motion to dismiss and supporting
memorandum shall be filed as set out above by February 29, 2012. Plaintiff
shall file any responsive memorandum by March 23, 2012, and any reply
brief may be filed by April 6, 2012.

CATHERINE D. PERRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated this 31st day of January, 2012.

-2-