Domai v. American Express et al

Filing 29

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - granting 27 Motion for Extension of Time to Amend. The deadline for Plaintiff to file a motion to amend his Amended Complaint is continued to May 2, 2014. All other deadlines in the Courts Scheduling Order remain unchanged. Signed by Judge Ted Stewart on 4/16/14. (ss)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH GUY M. DOMAI, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN EXPRESS, et al., Case No. 2:13-CV-567 TS Defendants. District Judge Ted Stewart This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Continuance. For the reasons discussed below, the Court will grant the Motion. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed his Complaint in this matter on June 26, 2013, and filed an Amended Complaint on September 27, 2013. Defendant American Express filed its Answer on October 30, 2013. On December 27, 2013, the Court established a Scheduling Order. Relevant to this Motion, the Court provided a deadline of March 11, 2014, for Plaintiff to file a motion to amend his Amended Complaint. On March 6, 2014, before the deadline to file a motion to amend had passed, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion. Plaintiff requests an extension of time to submit his motion to amend, arguing that he has been seriously ill and has been receiving treatment. Defendant objects to Plaintiff’s Motion. 1 II. DISCUSSION Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1)(A) provides that “[w]hen an act may or must be done within a specified time, the court may, for good cause, extend the time . . . with or without motion or notice if the court acts, or if a request is made, before the original time or its extension expires.” In this case, the Court finds that Plaintiff has demonstrated good cause. Plaintiff represents that he has been seriously ill and has been receiving treatment. As a result, Plaintiff requests additional time to file a motion to amend. Defendant objects to Plaintiff’s Motion, arguing that Plaintiff has failed to meet the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a). While this is true, the Court does not construe Plaintiff’s current Motion as seeking leave to amend. Rather, Plaintiff is only seeking an extension of the time by which he must file a motion to amend. The Court will grant that request, but by doing so the Court is not ruling on Plaintiff’s ultimate ability to file an amended complaint. The Court is merely extending the time for Plaintiff to file a motion to amend. Should Plaintiff choose to file such a motion, Plaintiff must comply with the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) and DUCivR 15-1. The Court will then have to consider whether Plaintiff has met the requirements of those rules. III. CONCLUSION It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Continuance (Docket No. 27) is GRANTED. The deadline for Plaintiff to file a motion to amend his Amended Complaint is continued to May 2, 2014. All other deadlines in the Court’s Scheduling Order (Docket No. 23) remain unchanged. 2 DATED this 16th day of April, 2014. BY THE COURT: Ted Stewart United States District Judge 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?