De Marco et al v. LaPay et al, No. 2:2009cv00190 - Document 89 (D. Utah 2011)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION granting 60 Motion to Strike 54 NOTICE of NAME AND IDENTITY OF DEFENDANT REFERRED TO IN PARAGRAPH 88 OF PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Ted Stewart on 05/26/2011. (asp)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION JAMES DEMARCO, et al., Plaintiffs, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT PALADIN DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, LCC S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF NAME AND IDENTITY OF DEFENDANT vs. MICHAEL LAPAY, et al., Case No. 2:09-CV-190 TS Defendants. This matter is before the Court on Defendant Paladin Development Partners, LLC s ( Paladin ) Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Notice of Name and Identity of Defendant Referred to in Paragraph 88 of Plaintiffs Complaint ( Notice ).1 Although this Motion was filed in October of 2010, to date, no response has been filed. Pursuant to DUCivR 7-1(d), [f]ailure to respond timely to a motion may result in the court s granting the motion without further notice. Having considered the merits of the Motion, the Court enters the following findings: 1 Paladin s Motion is filed at Docket No. 60. Plaintiffs Notice is filed at Docket No. 54. 1 1. Plaintiffs Notice appears to be an attempt to amend Plaintiffs Complaint or add a party to this litigation.2 2. Plaintiffs have not sought or obtained leave of the Court to amend their Complaint. Plaintiffs have not sought or obtained consent from Paladin to amend their Complaint. 3. The deadline for amending the Complaint in this matter or adding parties, pursuant to the Scheduling Order entered by the Court, was May 1, 2010. This date has passed. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs have failed to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this Court s Scheduling Order. Plaintiffs Notice appears to be an improper attempt to circumvent the Rules. Consequentially, the Court will strike Plaintiffs Notice. It is therefore ORDERED that Paladin s Motion to Strike (Docket No. 60) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs Notice of Name and Identity of Defendant Referred to in Paragraph 88 of Plaintiffs Complaint (Docket No. 54) is hereby STRICKEN. DATED May 26, 2011. BY THE COURT: _____________________________________ TED STEWART United States District Judge 2 See Docket No. 54, at 1-2 (indicating that a copy of the Notice will be sent to the person named so that such person may appear ). 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
