Opinion
Case No. 2:12-cv-01788-MMD-VCF
02-14-2013
JEREMY R. BEASLEY, et al., Plaintiff, v. AAA NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, NEVADA, UTAH, Defendant.
ORDER
(Motion to Amend Complaint - dkt. no. 15)
Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Amend/Correct the Complaint on January 7, 2013. (Dkt. no. 15.) In accordance with Local Rule 15-1(a), Plaintiffs attached the proposed Amended Complaint to their Motion. (Id.)The deadline to file a response to the Motion was January 24, 2013. (Dkt. no. 15.) Defendant did not file a response to the Motion.
Failure to file points and authorities in opposition to a motion constitutes consent that the motion be granted. L.R. 7-2(d); see Abbott v. United Venture Capital, Inc., 718 F. Supp. 828, 831 (D. Nev. 1989). The Court therefore GRANTS Plaintiffs' unopposed Motion.
Though Plaintiffs included the proposed Amended Complaint in their Motion, the document is not a separately-filed entry, but part of the same document as the Motion. Plaintiffs are therefore ORDERED to file the Amended Complaint as a separate docket entry. The Complaint should be entitled "First Amended Complaint," and Plaintiffs should delete any references to the Amended Complaint being a "proposed" document.
_______________
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE