Santino v. PetSmart, Inc.

Filing 16

ORDER granting 13 Motion to Amend. Defendant SHALL FILE its proposed amended answer [Doc. 13-1] in CM/ECF on or before March 7, 2014.Signed by Magistrate Judge H Bruce Guyton on 03/03/2014. (KAW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE
MINDY MARIE SANTINO,
Plaintiff,
v.
PETSMART, INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 3:12-CV-0458
(VARLAN/GUTYON)

ORDER
These cases are before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Rules of this
Court, and Standing Order 13-02.
Now before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Amend Its Answer to Include an
Affirmative Defense [Doc. 13]. The Court has reviewed the Motion to Amend. The Court finds
that the Motion to Amend complies with Local Rule 15.1, and the Court finds that it is welltaken pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The Plaintiff has not responded in opposition to the Motion to Amend, and the time for
doing so has expired. See E.D. Tenn. L.R. 7.1. The Court may treat the Plaintiff’s failure to
respond as acquiescence to the relief sought by Defendant. See E.D. Tenn. L.R. 7.2.
Accordingly, the Motion to Amend [Doc. 13] is GRANTED. Defendant SHALL FILE
its proposed amended answer [Doc. 13-1] in CM/ECF on or before March 7, 2014.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

ENTER:
/s H. Bruce Guyton
United States Magistrate Judge

2