Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00512/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00512-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Interval Equipment Solutions, Inc.
Cross Defendant
Sandvik Mining and Construction USA, LLC
Cross Claimant

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

INTERVAL EQUIPMENT SOLUTIONS, INC.,

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

SANDVIK MINING AND CONSTRUCTION 

USA, LLC,

 Defendant.

1:16-cv-512-LJO-SKO

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF 

LEAVE TO AMEND AND DENYING 

AS MOOT DEFENDANT’S MOTION 

TO DISMISS (Doc. 5)

On April 18, 2016, Defendant filed a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s 

complaint. Doc. 5. Twenty-three days later, on May 11, 2016, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint 

(“FAC”). Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(B), a plaintiff may file an amended complaint in response to a 

Rule 12(b) motion without the Court’s or the defendant’s permission so long as it is filed within 21 days 

after the Rule 12(b) motion is filed. If a plaintiff fails to comply with this 21-day deadline, any amended 

complaint may be filed only with the defendant’s “written consent or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 

15(a)(2).

Here, Plaintiff filed its FAC 23 days after Defendant filed its Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.

Plaintiff therefore was permitted to file the FAC only with Defendant’s written consent or the Court’s 

leave. Id. Defendant has not consented explicitly to the filing of the FAC, but appears not to object to the 

FAC’s consideration, as Defendant filed a notice withdrawing its motion to dismiss in light of the FAC. 

Case 1:16-cv-00512-LJO-SKO Document 9 Filed 05/17/16 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

2

Under these circumstances, the Court finds leave to amend is appropriate. Accordingly, the FAC shall be 

considered the operative complaint in this case. Defendant shall have twenty-one (21) days from the date 

of entry of this order to respond to the FAC. 

Because Defendant has withdrawn its motion to dismiss (Doc. 5), the Clerk of Court is directed 

to administratively terminate that motion. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 16, 2016 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00512-LJO-SKO Document 9 Filed 05/17/16 Page 2 of 2