Opinion
C. A. 22-cv-285-JJM-PAS
09-24-2024
ORDER
JOHN J. MCCONNELL, JR. CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
The Magistrate Judge issued two Reports and Recommendations (R&R) (ECF Nos. 59, 60) making a recommendation on how the Court should proceed with Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Document Supplemental Complaint (ECF No. 48) and Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Intervenor Complaint for Failure to State a Claim. ECF Nos. 53. After a through review of the R&R and the Motions, and having received no objections, the Court accepts both R&R's and rules as follows:
The Court DENIES Plaintiffs Motion to Supplement (ECF Nos. 47, 48) because the claims are largely unrelated to the pending Complaint, would cause more delay by adding new parties, and are futile. Further, Plaintiffs revisions to his pleading have spawned confusion not just for the Court, but also for the parties, regarding the timing of Defendants' obligation to respond to the Amended Complaint.
In the interest of clarity, now that the Amended Complaint (ECF No. 32, reduced in scope by the Court's granting in part of the motion to dismiss, Text Order of Apr. 23, 2024) is the operative pleading, Defendants are directed to file their responsive pleading within fourteen days.
And the Court DENIES Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 53) the intervention Complaint of Jayson Zeppieri for the reasons stated in the R&R.
IT IS SO ORDERED.