Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00397/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-00397-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Breach of Contract

---

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

Phillip L. Williams, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

John Hancock Variable Life Insurance

Company,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 07-397-PHX-MHM

ORDER

Presently pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended

Complaint (Doc. 20) and Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 7). To Defendant's Motion

to Dismiss, Plaintiff has filed a Response and Defendant has filed a Reply. The Court

considers the papers submitted and issues the following Order.

Defendant moved to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint because Plaintiff sought specific

performance when the complaint alleged that an adequate remedy at law was available. On

April 26, 2007, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint (Doc. 16). The Court issued a Notice

of Filer Deficiency stating that the document had been filed improperly without seeking leave

of the Court (Doc. 18). Plaintiff then filed a Motion for Leave to Amend his Complaint

(Doc. 20) and lodged the Amended Complaint (Doc. 19). In both Plaintiff's filed Amended

Complaint and his lodged Amended Complaint, Plaintiff seeks money damages. In its Reply,

Case 2:07-cv-00397-MHM Document 23 Filed 05/23/07 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 -

Defendant agrees that if the Court accepts for filing Plaintiff's Amended Complaint,

Defendant's Motion to Dismiss will be moot. 

Pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, "[a] party may amend the

party's pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served.

. ." See Fed.R.Civ.P. 7. A motion to dismiss is not a responsive pleading. Miles v.

Department of Army, 881 F.2d 777, 881 F.2d 777, 781 (9th Cir. 1989); Graham v. Goodyear

Aerospace Corp., 120 Ariz. 275, 276, 585 P.2d 884, 885 (App.1978).

Here, the Defendant has not filed a responsive pleading. Plaintiff was free to file his

first amended complaint as a mater of right pursuant to Rule 15, Fed.R.Civ.P. The Court

erred by issuing the filer deficiency stating that Plaintiff's Amended Complaint was filed in

error. 

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Doc. 16) is deemed

appropriately filed. The Clerk's Office is directed to file Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended

Complaint (Doc. 20) is denied as moot. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 7) is denied

as moot. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant shall have 20 days from the date the

Clerk's Office files the Amended Complaint to respond.

DATED this 22nd day of May, 2007.

Case 2:07-cv-00397-MHM Document 23 Filed 05/23/07 Page 2 of 2