Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02195/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02195-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1442 Petition for Removal

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TEODORO G. RUBANG, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

NAF-HUMAN RESOURCES, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:15-cv-02195-KJM-AC 

ORDER 

This matter is before the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). On January 21, 

2016, the court issued findings and recommendations that recommended defendants’ November 

30, 2015, motion to dismiss be granted with leave to amend. ECF No. 9. Those Findings and 

Recommendations remain pending. On February 1, 2016, plaintiff filed an FAC. ECF No. 10. 

Rule 15(a) allows parties to amend their pleadings “once as a matter of course” within 21 

days after serving it, or 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or motion. “In all other 

cases, a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent or the 

court’s leave.” Id. Plaintiff’s FAC was filed (1) more than 21 days after his original complaint 

was served and defendants’ motion to dismiss was filed, and (2) without the court’s leave or 

defendants’ written consent. In addition, plaintiff’s FAC was filed before the undersigned’s 

recommendation to grant defendants’ motion to dismiss with leave to amend could be ruled on by 

the presiding district judge. Accordingly, the court finds that plaintiff’s FAC was filed in 

Case 2:15-cv-02195-KJM-DB Document 12 Filed 02/12/16 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

violation of Rule 15(a) and this court’s instructions. Plaintiff’s FAC will be therefore be stricken. 

Plaintiff is informed that when the magistrate judge issues Findings and 

Recommendations, the district judge makes the final ruling. A recommendation for leave to 

amend is not an order granting leave to amend. Plaintiff may re-file his FAC only when, and if, 

the presiding district judge adopts the undersigned’s recommendation to dismiss his complaint 

with leave to amend. 

In accordance with the foregoing, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that: 

1. Plaintiff’s February 1, 2016, FAC (ECF No. 10) is hereby STRICKEN; and 

2. Defendants’ motion to strike (ECF No. 11) is DENIED as moot. 

DATED: February 11, 2016 

Case 2:15-cv-02195-KJM-DB Document 12 Filed 02/12/16 Page 2 of 2