Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04556/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04556-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:145 Patent Infringement

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEREMIAH W. BALIK,

Plaintiff,

v.

TOY TALK, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-04556-JST 

ORDER RE: AMENDED COMPLAINT 

AND DEADLINE FOR RESPONSIVE

PLEADING

Plaintiff Jeremiah W. Balik filed this patent infringement action on October 2, 2015. ECF 

No. 1. Defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure on November 19, 2015. Plaintiff Balik filed an amended complaint on 

November 23, 2015. ECF No. 27.

A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within 21 days after service of a 

motion under Rule 12(b). Fed. R. Civ. P. 15; St. Michael's Convalescent Hosp. v. State of Cal., 

643 F.2d 1369, 1374 (9th Cir. 1981). Plaintiff Balik’s amended complaint was timely filed. 

Defendants’ motion to dismiss is terminated. 

It appears, however, that the filed version of Plaintiff’s amended complaint is not 

complete. It is only two pages long, whereas his original complaint was eleven pages long and 

had 18 pages of attachments, exclusive of the summons. Also, his amended complaint is not

signed. A complaint in federal court must be signed by an attorney or, if a party is proceeding pro 

se, by the party himself. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a). 

Plaintiff may have until December 11, 2015 to file a complete, signed amended complaint. 

Defendants must file a motion to dismiss or responsive pleading by January 4, 2016. If Plaintiff 

does not file a revised amended complaint by December 11, 2015, the Court will strike the 

Case 3:15-cv-04556-JST Document 31 Filed 11/25/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

amended complaint at ECF Number 27 and reinstate Defendants’ motion to dismiss to the original 

complaint. Plaintiff’s opposition to that motion is due January 4, 2016 and Defendants’ reply is 

due January 11, 2016. The Court finds that the motion is suitable for decision without a hearing. 

Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 25, 2015

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-04556-JST Document 31 Filed 11/25/15 Page 2 of 2