Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_08-cv-08132/USCOURTS-azd-3_08-cv-08132-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jesse Dupris, et al.

Plaintiffs

v.

Selanhongva McDonald, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CV 08-8132-PCT-PGR CV 08-8133-PCT-PGR 

 (CONSOLIDATED)

 ORDER

Pursuant to the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint (Doc.

62), and good cause appearing therefor,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED GRANTING the Motion. (Doc. 62.) Plaintiffs are

advised that this will be the last opportunity to amend their complaint. The Court will

not grant any further motions to amend the complaint. It is this Court’s objective to consider

judgment on the merits whenever justifiable and there is no prejudice to the parties. The

Court recognizes that Defendants have been filing dispositive motions in an effort to resolve

the pending matter and they have set forth their arguments and defenses in so doing.

However, such does not amount to prejudice when balancing that with the effect of

dismissing a case based on failure to state a claim and not permitting leave to file an amended

complaint. The Court deems most valuable decisions on the merit. That being said, in the

pending matter, a Third Amended Complaint is where this Court finds justification makes

its final stop.

Furthermore, the Court recognizes that Defendants have previously filed two rounds

of motions to dismiss. In the event that they determine a third round is necessary, the

Case 3:08-cv-08132-PGR Document 66 Filed 05/04/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1 The Court notes that the second round of Motions to Dismiss addressed some issues

previously considered by the Court and was extremely similar to the first round of motions

despite the differences evident in the complaints. 

- 2 -

motions are to be tailored to the Third Amended Complaint, and shall not duplicate the first

two rounds of motions or address arguments previously addressed by the Court.1

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ pending Motions to Dismiss are

DENIED without prejudice. (Docs. 50 and 51.)

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages

is DENIED as Moot. (Doc. 57.)

 DATED this 4th day of May, 2010.

Case 3:08-cv-08132-PGR Document 66 Filed 05/04/10 Page 2 of 2