Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-02008/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-02008-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 445
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment
Cause of Action: 29:0794 Job Discrimination (Handicap)

---

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Paul C. Du Hart, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Intel Corporation, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-08-2008-PHX-FJM

ORDER

We have before us defendant Intel Corporation’s motion to dismiss and alternative

motion for more definite statement (doc. 17). Plaintiff has not responded to the motion and

the time for doing so has passed. Under LRCiv 7.2(i), if a party “does not serve and file the

required answering memoranda . . . such noncompliance may be deemed a consent to the

denial or granting of the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily.” 

Defendant moves to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(2) and (5), Fed. R. Civ.

P., because service of process was untimely. By order dated April 1, 2009, we extended

plaintiff’s deadline to effect service under Rule 4, Fed. R. Civ. P., until May 1, 2009 (doc.

13). Plaintiff complied with our order and returned the summons executed on April 29, 2009

(doc. 15). Accordingly, we deny defendant’s motion to dismiss. 

Defendant moves in the alternative for a more definite statement under Rule 12(e),

Fed. R. Civ. P. “A party may move for a more definite statement of a pleading to which a

responsive pleading is allowed but which is so vague or ambiguous that the party cannot

Case 2:08-cv-02008-FJM Document 19 Filed 06/29/09 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

- 2 -

reasonably prepare a response.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(e). We will grant defendant’s request for

a more definite statement and order that plaintiff file an amended complaint setting forth the

factual and legal bases for this action in numbered paragraphs “each limited as far as

practicable to a single set of circumstances.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Plaintiff will have to and

including July 16, 2009 to file an amended complaint. If an amended complaint is not filed

by that date, this action will be dismissed under Rule 12(e), Fed. R. Civ. P. 

Therefore, IT IS ORDERED DENYING defendant’s motion to dismiss AND

GRANTING defendant’s alternative motion for more definite statement (doc. 17). 

DATED this 26th day of June, 2009.

Case 2:08-cv-02008-FJM Document 19 Filed 06/29/09 Page 2 of 2