Delmonico v. Pueblo Community Health Center, Inc.

Full title: ANTONIO DELMONICO, Plaintiff, v. PUEBLO COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER, INC…

Court: United States District Court, D. Colorado

Date published: Mar 23, 2006

Civil Action No. 05-cv-01202-LTB-BNB (D. Colo. Mar. 23, 2006)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 05-cv-01202-LTB-BNB.

March 23, 2006

ORDER

BOYD BOLAND, Magistrate Judge

This matter is before me on Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint (the "Motion"), filed March 15, 2006. The plaintiff seeks leave to supplement his Complaint with numerous statements.

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that a complaint may be amended as follows:

A party may amend the party's pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served. . . . Otherwise a party may amend the party's pleading only by leave of court or by written consent of the adverse party.

Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a).

The defendant has not filed a responsive pleading in this action.¹ Pursuant to Rule 15(a), the plaintiff is entitled to amend his Complaint once as a matter of course.²

1 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment, filed January 19, 2006, is not a responsive pleading. Cooper v. Shumway, 780 F.2d 27, 29 (10^th Cir. 1985).

2 On June 29, 2005, the plaintiff was directed by the Court to resubmit his Complaint on the proper form. Such directives are routinely given to pro se plaintiffs upon filing of their initial complaints. I do not consider the mandatory amendments to be amendments "as a matter of course" under Rule 15.

The plaintiff may not simply submit supplements to his initial Complaint, however. Instead, he must file a complete amended complaint. The plaintiff may not incorporate by reference his original Complaint into the amended complaint. The amended complaint must stand alone; it must contain all of the plaintiff's claims. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.