Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-3_24-cv-08212/USCOURTS-azd-3_24-cv-08212-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Crash Champions Collision Repair
Defendant
Progressive Insurance Company
Defendant
Sherri Strole
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

Sherri Strole,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Progressive Insurance Company, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-24-08212-PCT-KML

ORDER 

On November 8, 2024, plaintiff Sherri Strole filed this suit against Progressive 

Insurance Company and Crash Champions Collision Repair. (Doc. 1.) The court informed 

Strole she was responsible for service of the summons and complaint. (Doc. 5.) The docket 

does not indicate Strole has served either defendant.

On December 12, 2024, Strole filed a “Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay 

Proceedings.” (Doc. 11.) That motion argues the parties have a valid arbitration agreement,

but it does not explain why Strole filed this suit if she wishes to proceed directly to 

arbitration. That is, Strole likely could have initiated arbitration without first filing this suit 

and obtaining an order compelling arbitration. Because this motion appears premature or 

unnecessary, it is denied without prejudice. Strole may renew the motion if she can show 

a present need for an order compelling arbitration.

On December 23, 2024, Strole filed a motion to amend the complaint. (Doc. 14.) 

Strole explains she wishes to add another entity as a defendant. (Doc. 14 at 2.) The lodged 

document associated with that motion, however, is not a proposed amended complaint. 

Case 3:24-cv-08212-KML Document 16 Filed 01/02/25 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

Instead, it is a proposed summons. (Doc. 15.) Local Rule 15.1 requires a party seeking to 

amend its complaint attach a copy of the proposed complaint as an exhibit to the motion 

and that copy must include “bracketing or strike through the text to be deleted and 

underlining the text to be added.” Because Strole did not indicate what changes she wished 

to make to her complaint, the motion to amend is denied without prejudice. Strole may file 

a renewed motion to amend but if she has not yet served the current complaint, she may 

amend her complaint without leave of court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED the Motion to Compel Arbitration (Doc. 11) and Motion to 

Amend (Doc. 14) are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Dated this 2nd day of January, 2025.

Case 3:24-cv-08212-KML Document 16 Filed 01/02/25 Page 2 of 2