Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-04204/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-04204-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1444 Petition for Removal- Foreclosure

---

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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ROSALIO ALVAREZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-04204-BLF 

ORDER GRANTING LEAVE FOR 

PLAINTIFF TO FILE FIRST 

AMENDED COMPLAINT AND 

DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT'S 

MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

On September 22, 2015, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint. On 

November 4, 2015, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) allows a party to amend a pleading once as a matter of course within

“(A) 21 days after serving it, or (B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is 

required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under 

Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” In all other cases, a party may amend its pleading 

only with consent of the opposing party or the court’s leave. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). 

Here, Plaintiff’s first amended complaint was filed more than 21 days after Defendant’s 

motion to dismiss was filed. The last day to amend the complaint as a matter of course was on 

October 13, 2015 and as a result Plaintiff could not file a first amended complaint on November 4, 

2015 without the consent of Defendant or leave of the Court. Although Plaintiff has not indicated 

whether Defendant consented to the filing of the first amended complaint, Defendant has not filed 

an objection to Plaintiff’s first amended complaint, nor has it filed a notice of non-opposition to its 

motion to dismiss.

It appears that the parties may believe that the first amended complaint is the operative 

Case 5:15-cv-04204-BLF Document 16 Filed 12/30/15 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

pleading. Accordingly, for the clarity of the record, the Court construes Plaintiff’s first amended 

complaint to include a motion for leave to file a first amended complaint. The Court GRANTS 

Plaintiff’s motion and advises the parties that the first amended complaint was filed on November 

4, 2015. In light of the first amended complaint, the Court DENIES AS MOOT Defendant’s 

motion to dismiss. Defendant shall answer or otherwise respond to the first amended complaint 

no later than January 20, 2016. Counsel for Plaintiff is advised to follow the Federal Rules of 

Civil Procedure and Civil Local Rules with all future filings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 30, 2015

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:15-cv-04204-BLF Document 16 Filed 12/30/15 Page 2 of 2