Mendoza v. United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement et al

Filing 55

ORDER denying U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's motion to strike and granting 53 the plaintiff's motion to authorize discovery to the extent discovery is allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d). Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (TRL)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

RAMON MENDOZA,
Plaintiff,

8:13CV65

vs.

ORDER

JUSTIN OSTERBERG, et al.,
Defendants.

This matter is before the court on the motion to strike (Filing No. 51) filed by U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). ICE seeks to be removed as a party or
have the plaintiff’s amended complaint (Filing No. 46) stricken from the record because,
although the plaintiff received the court’s permission to file the amended complaint, it is
not identical to the proposed pleading. The plaintiff filed a response brief coupled with a
motion to authorize discovery (Filing No. 53).

The plaintiff opposes ICE’s motion

arguing the amended complaint is consistent with the court’s order (Filing No. 44) and,
in any event, removes ICE as a defendant. ICE was terminated as a party to this action
when the amended complaint was filed on September 18, 2013. See Filing No. 46.
Accordingly, ICE improvidently filed the September 30, 2013, motion and such motion is
denied.

IT IS ORDERED:
1.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s motion to strike (Filing No.

51) is denied.
2.

The plaintiff’s motion to authorize discovery (Filing No. 53) is granted to

the extent discovery is allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d).
Dated this 15th day of October, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Thomas D. Thalken
United States Magistrate Judge