From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Oliverio v. Nextel W. Corp. Sprint/Nextel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Apr 5, 2013
Case No. 13-10296 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 5, 2013)

Opinion

Case No. 13-10296

04-05-2013

Mark S. Oliverio and Diane Oliverio, Plaintiffs, v. Nextel West Corporation Sprint /Nextel, Defendant.


Honorable Sean F. Cox


ORDER STRIKING

INFORMAL REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT

CONTAINED WITHIN PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE BRIEF

Acting through Counsel, Plaintiffs filed suit against Defendant in state court. Defendant removed the action to this Court, based on diversity jurisdiction. Thereafter, on January 30, 2013, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss. (Docket Entry No. 3).

On February 19, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a brief in response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. (Docket Entry No. 6). In that brief, Plaintiffs state that they wish to amend their complaint.

At this stage of the litigation, Plaintiffs may amend their complaint "only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a).

Defendant's Reply Brief indicates that Defendant does not consent to Plaintiffs filing an amended complaint.

Plaintiffs have not filed a motion seeking leave of this Court to file an amended complaint. Moreover, pursuant to Local Rule 15.1, a party who seeks leave to file an amended complaint must attach a copy of the proposed amended complaint to its motion seeking leave to file an amended complaint.

IT IS ORDERED that the Court hereby STRIKES the informal request to file an amended complaint that is contained within Plaintiffs' Response Brief.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, if Plaintiffs wish to file an amended complaint, they shall file a formal motion seeking leave to file an amended complaint no later April 16, 2013, at 5:00 p.m., and they must attach their proposed amended complaint as an exhibit to such motion.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiffs do not file a motion seeking leave to file an amended complaint by the above date, this Court shall proceed with the hearing on Defendant's pending Motion to Dismiss on April 25, 2013, and shall rule based upon the briefs filed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

___________________

Sean F. Cox

United States District Judge
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on April 5, 2013, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

Jennifer McCoy

Case Manager


Summaries of

Oliverio v. Nextel W. Corp. Sprint/Nextel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Apr 5, 2013
Case No. 13-10296 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 5, 2013)
Case details for

Oliverio v. Nextel W. Corp. Sprint/Nextel

Case Details

Full title:Mark S. Oliverio and Diane Oliverio, Plaintiffs, v. Nextel West…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Apr 5, 2013

Citations

Case No. 13-10296 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 5, 2013)