Opinion
21-cv-02637-HSG
12-02-2021
GEORGE JARVIS AUSTIN, Plaintiff, v. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE IRS ET. AL., Defendant.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
RE: DKT. NOS. 36, 38, 39
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On November 25, 2021, Plaintiff moved for leave to file an amended complaint. See Dkt. No. 36. On November 29, 2021, Plaintiff filed two additional motions, appearing to once again ask for leave to file an amended complaint and to continue any hearing until after leave to file an amended complaint is granted. See Dkt. Nos. 38, 39. Under the local civil rules for the Northern District of California, “any party filing or moving to file an amended pleading must reproduce the entire proposed pleading . . . .” Civil L.R. 10-1. In his motions, Plaintiff does not explain how he intends to amend his complaint, nor does he attach a proposed amended complaint. See Dkt. Nos. 36, 38, 39.
Defendant's motion to dismiss is also pending, see Dkt. No. 29, with that motion set to be heard on December 9, 2021. If necessary, the Court will address whether amendment is warranted in ruling on the motion to dismiss. 1
Accordingly, the Court DENIES without prejudice Plaintiffs motions (docket numbers 36, 38, and 39).
IT IS SO ORDERED. 2