Patel v. Microsoft Corporation

Filing 33

ORDER striking Plaintiff's #31 Motion to Expedite and Limiting Filings. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to not file on the docket any future amended complaints in this case unless the Court grants Plaintiff leave to amend or Plaintiff receives the Defendant's written consent to do so. Signed by Judge John H. Chun. (SB)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

6
7
8

RAJ K. PATEL,
Plaintiff,

9
10
11
12

CASE NO. 2:24-cv-00130-JHC

v.

ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO EXPEDITE AND LIMITING
FILINGS

MICROSOFT CORPORATION ,
Defendant.

13
14

This matter comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff’s “Motion to Expedite.” Dkt. #

15

31. The Court STRIKES the motion because it is not in compliance with the Federal Rules of

16

Civil Procedure or the Local Civil Rules.

17

It should be noted that, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1), Plaintiff may

18

amend his complaint “once as a matter of course.” “In all other cases, a party may amend its

19

pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. Civ. P.

20

15(a)(2). The Plaintiff has filed four amended complaints, Dkts. # 25, 26, 27, 32, since the Court

21

dismissed Plaintiff’s first complaint with leave to amend as to certain issues, Dkt. # 21.

22
23
24
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO EXPEDITE AND LIMITING FILINGS - 1

1

The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to not file on the docket any future amended complaints

2

in this case unless the Court grants Plaintiff leave to amend or Plaintiff receives the Defendant’s

3

written consent to do so.

4

Dated this 27th day of March, 2024.

5
6
7

John H. Chun
United States District Judge

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO EXPEDITE AND LIMITING FILINGS - 2