Demond v. Infiniti HR LLC et al, No. 3:2017cv01322 - Document 84 (N.D. Tex. 2018)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 80 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Cross-Claim filed by Online Sales Step by Step, Cynthia Gail Stine. (Ordered by Judge Sidney A Fitzwater on 5/3/2018) (Judge Sidney A Fitzwater)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Demond v. Infiniti HR LLC et al Doc. 84 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION LESLEY DEMOND, Plaintiff, VS. INFINITI HR, LLC, et al., Defendants. § § § § Civil Action No. 3:17-CV-1322-D § § § § § MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendants-cross-plaintiffs Online Sales Step by Step, LLC d/b/a eGrowth Partners (“eGrowth”) and Cynthia Gail Stine (“Stine”) move for leave to amend cross-claim. No response to the motion has been filed, and the court now grants it.* Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) provides that “[t]he court should freely give leave [to amend] when justice so requires.” Additionally, when, as here, a motion for leave to amend is filed before the deadline in the scheduling order for filing such a motion, the court applies a “presumption of timeliness.” Poly-Am., Inc. v. Serrot Int’l, Inc., 2002 WL 206454, at *1 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 7, 2002) (Fitzwater, J.). Defendant-cross-defendant Infiniti HR, LLC (“Infiniti”) has not responded to eGrowth and Stine’s motion, although in their brief eGrowth and Stine indicate that Infiniti opposes the motion as moot (i.e., futile) due to its pending * Under § 205(a)(5) of the E-Government Act of 2002 and the definition of “written opinion” adopted by the Judicial Conference of the United States, this is a “written opinion[] issued by the court” because it “sets forth a reasoned explanation for [the] court’s decision.” It has been written, however, primarily for the parties, to decide issues presented in this case, and not for publication in an official reporter, and should be understood accordingly. Dockets.Justia.com forum non conveniens motion to dismiss pursuant to contractual forum selection clause. Accordingly, the court grants eGrowth and Stine’s motion for leave to amend cross-claim. Because Infiniti filed its forum non conveniens motion to dismiss pursuant to contractual forum selection clause before the court granted eGrowth and Stine leave to file their amended cross-claim, the court will permit eGrowth and Stine to file a surreply to the motion to dismiss that addresses whether the filing of their amended cross-claim affects the merits of that motion. They must do so within 14 days of the date this memorandum opinion and order is filed. Infiniti may file a final reply within 14 days of the date eGrowth and Stine’s surreply is filed. SO ORDERED. May 3, 2018 _________________________________ SIDNEY A. FITZWATER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -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.
