From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Antone v. M.D.C. Holdings, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 7, 2007
2:07-cv-699-GEB-KJM (E.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2007)

Opinion

2:07-cv-699-GEB-KJM.

August 7, 2007


ORDER CONTINUING STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING) CONFERENCE


On July 31, 2007, the parties filed a proposed order approving the parties' stipulation for Plaintiff to file a First Amended Complaint. However, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) states that "a party may amend [its] pleading only by leave of court or by written consent of the adverse party." Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) (emphasis added). Accordingly, the parties have not shown why their proposed order is required, and it will not be signed.

Plaintiff's proposed First Amended Complaint, which has only been filed as an exhibit to the parties' stipulation, does not effectuate amending the complaint.

Further, the status (pretrial scheduling) conference scheduled for August 13, 2007, is continued to October 1, 2007, at 9:00 a.m. A further joint status report shall be filed no later than fourteen days prior to the status conference.

The failure of one or more of the parties to participate in the preparation of the Joint Status Report does not excuse the other parties from their obligation to timely file a status report in accordance with this Order. In the event a party fails to participate as ordered, the party timely submitting the status report shall include a declaration explaining why it was unable to obtain the cooperation of the other party or parties.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Antone v. M.D.C. Holdings, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
Aug 7, 2007
2:07-cv-699-GEB-KJM (E.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2007)
Case details for

Antone v. M.D.C. Holdings, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:AVRAM ANTONE, Plaintiff, v. M.D.C. HOLDINGS, INC., Defendant

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

Date published: Aug 7, 2007

Citations

2:07-cv-699-GEB-KJM (E.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2007)