Jarreau-Griffin v. City of Vallejo

Full title: ANDREA JARREAU-GRIFFIN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF VALLEJO, et al.…

Court: United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Nov 6, 2013

2:12-CV-2979 KJM KJN (E.D. Cal. Nov. 6, 2013)

Opinion

ANDREA JARREAU-GRIFFIN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF VALLEJO, et al., Defendants. No. 2:12-CV-2979 KJM KJN United States District Court, E.D. California. November 6, 2013

          ORDER

          KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.

         Pending before the court is defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings, which the court ordered submitted without argument. After considering the motion and the docket in this case, the court DENIES the motion without prejudice.

         Under Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a motion for judgment on the pleadings may be filed "[a]fter the pleadings are closed-but early enough not to delay trial...." The pleadings are closed once a complaint and an answer have been filed, assuming there is no counterclaim or cross-claim. Doe v. United States, 419 F.3d 1058, 1061 (9th Cir. 2005). A motion under Rule 12(c) filed before an answer is filed is "procedurally premature" and should be denied. Id. The docket in this case reflects that neither defendant has filed an answer.

         IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

         1. Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings, ECF No. 23, is denied without prejudice; and

         2. Plaintiffs' ex parte application for an extension of time, ECF No. 28, is denied as moot.