Underdue v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Filing 26

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 20 Motion for Extension of Time to Amend re 1 Complaint ; Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 7/12/17. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(ssh) Modified on 7/13/2017 (ssh). Plaintiff has 15 days to file proposed Amended Complaint as exhibit to [doc 25]; Plaintiff has 15 days to respond to [doc 8]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-00653-RJC
FELICIA A. UNDERDUE,
Plaintiff,
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to
Respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, (Doc. No. 20); Defendant’s Response In Opposition
to the Motion, (Doc. No. 22); Plaintiff’s Affidavit re Motion for Extension of Time to File
Response (Doc. No. 23); Plaintiff’s Reply In Support of her Motion (Doc. No. 24); and Plaintiff’s
Motion to Amend Complaint, (Doc. No. 25).
In Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss,
Plaintiff sought leave for an extension of fifteen days to respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss,
(Doc. No. 8), and additionally sought leave to amend her complaint freely. (Doc. No. 20).
Defendant filed a response stating that it does not object to the extension of time, but requesting
that Plaintiff file and amended complaint along with her request in order to evaluate the merits of
granting leave to amend. (Doc. No. 22). Now, pro se Plaintiff has formalized her request for leave
to file an amended complaint through her Motion to Amend Complaint, (Doc. No. 25), but again
has failed to attach her proposed amended complaint to her motion. Although Plaintiff has had
ample time to respond to the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, the Court will grant Plaintiff an
additional fifteen days to respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff is further directed

to file within fifteen (15) of this order her proposed amended complaint in connection with her
Motion to Amend Complaint, pursuant to Western District of North Carolina Administrative
Procedures Governing Filing and Service by Electronic Means, Section II (A)(8) (“If filing a
document requires leave of the Court, such as an amended complaint, the attorney [or pro se
plaintiff in this case] shall attach the proposed document as an exhibit to the motion . . . .”).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time, (Doc. No. 20), is GRANTED in
part and DENIED in part. Specifically, Plaintiff’s request for a fifteen
(15) day extension to file a response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss,
(Doc. No. 8), is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s response to Defendant’s Motion to
Dismiss is due fifteen (15) days from the date of this Order. Plaintiff’s
request to amend her complaint freely is DENIED.
2. Plaintiff is ORDERED to file within fifteen (15) days of the date of this
Order a proposed amended complaint in connection with her Motion to
Amend Complaint, (Doc. No. 25). Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s
Motion to Amend Complaint, if any, is due fourteen (14) days after Plaintiff
files her proposed amended complaint.
Signed: July 12, 2017