Courtman v. Midland Credit Management, Inc.
Filing
15
ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer vacating 6 Motion to Dismiss. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/28/2012)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
No. C 12-3724 CRB
MONICA COURTMAN,
ORDER
Plaintiff,
v.
MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT,
INC.,
Defendant.
/
Now pending before the Court is Defendant’s motion to dismiss. See Dkt. 6.
Plaintiff’s opposition states that she would like leave to file an amended complaint to address
some of the issues raised by Defendant’s motion. See Opp’n at 3 (dkt. 13).
A party may amend her complaint once as a matter of course at any time before a
responsive pleading is served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Defendant has not answered the
complaint; instead, it has filed a motion to dismiss. In the Ninth Circuit a motion to dismiss
is not considered a “responsive” pleading. See Miles v. Dep’t of Army, 881 F.2d 777, 781
(9th Cir. 1989). Thus, Plaintiff does not require leave of court to file a first amended
complaint. See Rhoades v. Avon Products, Inc., 504 F.3d 1151, 1158 (9th Cir. 2007).
Plaintiff shall file her amended complaint within twenty days of this order. If the
amended complaint is not filed by that date, the Court will take the motion to dismiss under
1
submission. If an amended complaint is filed, Defendant, if it wishes to challenge the
2
sufficiency of the amended complaint, will have to file a new motion to dismiss. The
3
September 7, 2012, hearing is VACATED.
4
IT IS SO ORDERED.
5
6
7
CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: August 28, 2012
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
G:\CRBALL\2012\3724\Order granting leave to amend.wpd
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
