Opinion
Civil Action No. 10-cv-01249-MSK-MEH.
September 14, 2010
ORDER
The Joint Motion Concerning Amended Complaint and Response Thereto [filed September 13, 2010; docket #40] is granted as follows. Defendants are correct in that the Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiffs at docket #39 was improperly filed. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(1)(B), Plaintiffs could have filed an amended pleading once as a matter of course within 21 days after service of Defendants' motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), in part. Defendants filed their motion to dismiss on August 9, 2010. ( See docket #24.) Thus, if Plaintiffs were to exercise their right to file an amended complaint as a matter of course, Plaintiffs had until August 30, 2010, to file such amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed their Amended Complaint on September 3, 2010. (Docket #39; see also docket #37.)
As Plaintiffs filed their Amended Complaint out of time, the Court looks to the standard articulated in Rule 15(a)(2), providing that "a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave. The court should freely give leave when justice so requires." In this joint motion, Defendants state they "will consent to Plaintiffs' filing of the amended complaint under Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) provided that the Court gives Defendants sufficient time to respond to the amended complaint. . . ." (Docket #40 at 2.) Defendants ask the Court to set the deadline for their answer or other response at November 9, 2010. ( Id. at 4.)
Although this extension of time is substantial considering the date the case was filed, the Court accepts the parties' contention that the complexity of the issues and claims necessitates an extended pleading schedule. Accordingly, the Court accepts the Amended Complaint as entered at docket #39 and orders that Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint on or before November 9, 2010.
Dated at Denver, Colorado, this 14th day of September, 2010.