Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06822/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-06822-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ann Chapman
Defendant
Eleanor Lindquist
Plaintiff
Jeffrey C. Lindquist
Defendant
Jeff Payne
Defendant
Robert Vanden Bos
Defendant
Vanden Bos & Chapman
Defendant
Ian R. Yourtz
Defendant

Document Text:

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ELEANOR LINDQUIST,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ANN CHAPMAN, ROBERT VANDEN BOS,

VANDEN BOS & CHAPMAN, A Law Firm,

JEFF PAYNE, IAN R. YOURTZ, JEFFREY

C. LINDQUIST and FIRST DOE THROUGH

TENTH DOE, Inclusive,

Defendants. /

No. C 06-06822 WHA

ORDER RE AMENDED

COMPLAINT

The Court has received Mr. Nash’s letter dated February 10, 2007. Mr. Nash is correct

insofar as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) permits a party to amend the pleading “once as

a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served.” As such, this order

VACATES only the portion of the February 6 order that required plaintiff to request leave to file

an amended complaint. The remainder of that order stands. Furthermore, the order dated

February 9, 2007, that struck plaintiff’s amended complaint also stands. Any amended

complaint must be filed by NOON on FEBRUARY 23, 2007. In amending the complaint plaintiff

should carefully consider the reasons for dismissal stated in the February 6 order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 12, 2007. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-06822-WHA Document 33 Filed 02/13/07 Page 1 of 1