Opinion
5:24-cv-00153
06-10-2024
VICKY LYNN, Plaintiff, v. DANIEL J. BEERS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
David A. Ruiz, United States District Judge.
On February 1, 2023, a class action complaint was filed in the District Coin! of South Carolina. (R. 1). On January 25, 2024, this action was transferred to the Northern District of Ohio after the latter determined that this action was related to an action before this Court- Glasgow v. Beers, et al., 5:21-cv-2001-DAR. On March 28, 2024, this Court instructed all Defendants to file an Answer no later than April 26, 2024, notwithstanding the fact that a defendant may also have filed a motion to dismiss.
Answers were filed on the specified date. (R. 113, 114 & 115).
On the same date, the Corn! denied several motions to dismiss as moot to the extent they asserted a lack of jurisdiction before the South Carolina District Corn!. (R. 111 & 112). The Corut further denied without prejudice Defendants' Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim “subject to potential refiling after the Corut holds a status conference.” Id. (emphasis added).
Notwithstanding the above instructions, two sets of Defendants filed separate motions to dismiss. (R. 116 & 118). Those motions are hereby DENIED without prejudice as premature.
On May 17, 2024, without leave of Corut and contrary to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint. (R. 123). Defendants filed a Joint Motion to Strike the Amended Complaint, indicating Plaintiff had failed to seek Defendants' consent or leave of Court. (R. 127). The Motion to Strike (R. 127) is GRANTED. No motion for leave to amend the Complaint shall be filed until the parties have discussed the issue of amending the pleadings at a planning meeting and until the Court holds a case management conference providing further instructions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.