Hubbard v. St. Louis Psychiatric Rehabilitation Center

Filing 40

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, no later than June 25, 2012, Plaintiff shall file a proposed amended complaint contemporaneously with a motion for leave to file an amended complaint that includes each and every claim he wishes to br ing against every defendant in this action. Clayton, 778 F.2d at 460. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss With Motion to Add Additional Party and Amend Complaint 38 is DENIED.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff fails to timely comply with this order, the Court shall dismiss this action without prejudice. Signed by Honorable John A. Ross on 6/19/12. (LAH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

MYRON HUBBARD,
Plaintiff,
v.
ST. LOUIS PSYCHIATRIC
REHABILITATION CENTER,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:11-CV-2082-JAR

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion to Dismiss With
Motion to Add Additional Party and Amend Complaint [ECF No. 38]. The Court construes this
latest filing as an amended complaint. To preserve the right to amend his complaint, Plaintiff
must file a separate motion for leave to amend, with the proposed amendment attached. Clayton
v. White Hall School Dist., 778 F.2d 457, 460 (8th Cir. 1985). Plaintiff is again cautioned that
the amended complaint will replace all preceding complaints, and claims that are not realleged
will be deemed abandoned. E.g., In re Wireless Telephone Federal Cost Recovery Fees
Litigation, 396 F.3d 922, 928 (8th Cir. 2005). For each defendant, Plaintiff must set out the
factual circumstances surrounding their alleged wrongful conduct. Failure to comply with the
Court's instructions or the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure may result in dismissal of this action.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, no later than June 25, 2012, Plaintiff shall file a
proposed amended complaint contemporaneously with a motion for leave to file an amended
complaint that includes each and every claim he wishes to bring against every defendant in this

action. Clayton, 778 F.2d at 460.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion to Dismiss With
Motion to Add Additional Party and Amend Complaint [38] is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff fails to timely comply with this order, the
Court shall dismiss this action without prejudice.

Dated the 19th day of June, 2012.

_______________________________
JOHN A. ROSS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2