Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-04371/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-04371-41/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 870
Nature of Suit: Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 28:1340 IRS: Custom Duties

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

DOUGLAS R. CARAWAY, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 08-cv-04371-MMC 

ORDER APPROVING FILING OF 

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Re: Dkt. No. 206

Before the Court is the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”), filed October 25, 

2016, by plaintiff United States of America, purportedly “pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1) [of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure].” (See SAC at 1:27-28.) 

Contrary to plaintiff’s asserted authority for such filing, however, Rule 15 provides 

no such support. Rather, after a first amended complaint has been filed, “a party may 

amend its pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” 

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Here, the docket reflects no such stipulation or motion for 

such leave. Nevertheless, given the nature of the amendment, the Court hereby 

APPROVES the filing nunc pro tunc.

1

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 27, 2016

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

 

1 Additionally, the Court deems answers filed in response to the First Amended 

Complaint to be responsive to the SAC.

Case 3:08-cv-04371-MMC Document 208 Filed 10/27/16 Page 1 of 1