Salazar et al v. Landis+Gyr Technology, Inc., et al

Filing 44

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER... IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Henkels & McCoy, Inc.'s Motion to Strike Defendant Landis+Gyr Technology, Inc. 's Amended Cross Claim against Co-Defendant Henkels & McCoy, Inc. (ECF No. 40 ) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Henkels & McCoy, Inc. 's Motion to Dismiss Landis+Gyr Technology, Inc. 's Cross Claim Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) (ECF No. 22 ) is DENIED as MOOT. Signed by District Judge Ronnie L. White on 6/24/2015. (NEB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
JAMES SALAZAR and DAWN SALAZAR,
Plaintiffs,
v.
LANDIS+GYR TECHNOLOGY, INC. ,
formerly doing business as CELLNET
TECHNOLOGY, INC. , and HENKELS &
McCOY, INC. ,
Defendants.

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

No. 4:14CV1974 RLW

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Henkels & McCoy, Inc. ' s ("Henkels")
Motion to Strike Defendant Landis+Gyr Technology, Inc.'s ("Landis+Gyr") Amended Cross
Claim against Co-Defendant Henkels & McCoy, Inc. (ECF No. 40). Henkels argues that
Landis+Gyr' s Amended Cross Claim, filed on June 15, 2015, violates the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure because the amended claim is untimely, and Landis+Gyr did not request leave of court
to file or obtain prior consent from

Henkel~.

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). On January 28, 2015,

this Court issued a Case Management Order pursuant to an agreed-upon Joint Proposed
Scheduling Order and Discovery Plan. (ECF No. 15) The CMO provides that " [a]ll motions for
joinder of additional parties or amendment of pleadings shall be filed no later than June 15,
2015." (Case Management Order, ECF No. 19)

In response to Henkels ' Motion to Strike, Landis+Gyr states that its Amended Cross
Claim complies with the June 15, 2015 deadline set forth in the CMO. The Court agrees and
finds that Landis+Gyr' s Amended Cross Claim was timely filed in accordance with the CMO.
Therefore, the Court will deny Henkels ' Motion to Strike.

Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Henkels & McCoy, Inc. ' s Motion to Strike
Defendant Landis+Gyr Technology, Inc. ' s Amended Cross Claim against Co-Defendant Henkels
& McCoy, Inc. (ECF No. 40) is DENIED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Henkels & McCoy, Inc. ' s Motion to
Dismiss Landis+Gyr Technology, Inc. ' s Cross Claim Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) (ECF
No. 22) is DENIED as MOOT.
Dated this 24th day of June, 2015.

~/jffe
RONNIE L. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2