Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02850/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-02850-9/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 480
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1601 Truth in Lending

---

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 1

Plaintiff’s proposed TAC shall be clearly identified as “Plaintiff’s Proposed Third

Amended Complaint.”

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SUMAN K. TOOR,

Plaintiff,

 v.

FARHAD KHAN, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C-09-2850 MMC

ORDER AFFORDING PLAINTIFF LEAVE

TO SUPPLEMENT REQUEST FOR

LEAVE TO AMEND

The Court is in receipt of plaintiff Suman K. Toor’s “Request for Leave to Amend,”

filed May 3, 2010, by which plaintiff seeks leave to file a Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”). 

Plaintiff did not, however, provide the proposed TAC with her request.

Under the Local Rules of this District, a party “moving to file an amended pleading

must reproduce the entire proposed pleading.” See Civil L.R. 10-1. Unless and until

plaintiff provides her proposed TAC, the Court cannot rule on plaintiff’s request.

Accordingly, the Court hereby affords plaintiff leave to supplement her request by

filing and serving on all defendants, no later than May 21, 2010, her proposed TAC.1

If, as of May 21, 2010, plaintiff has not filed her proposed TAC, plaintiff’s request for

leave to amend will be denied, and the instant action will consist of the remaining claims in

Case 3:09-cv-02850-MMC Document 62 Filed 05/05/10 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

plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint.

If, as of May 21, 2010, plaintiff has filed a proposed TAC, the Court, as necessary,

will set a briefing schedule on the request for leave to amend.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 5, 2010 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02850-MMC Document 62 Filed 05/05/10 Page 2 of 2