Opinion
No. 2:12-CV-0543-LKK-CMK
01-02-2013
SIRRIUM, Plaintiff, v. BANK OF AMERICA NA, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. Pending before the court is plaintiff's second motion for leave to further amend the complaint (Doc. 24). As with the prior motion for leave to amend, the current motion will be denied for the same two reasons. First, plaintiff did not submit a proposed amended complaint. Plaintiff's failure to do so makes it impossible for the court to evaluate whether leave to amend should be granted. Second, plaintiff's motion was not properly noticed for hearing before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to amend (Doc. 24) is denied without prejudice.
______________________
CRAIG M. KELLISON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE