1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02224-WJM-CBS

TERENCE J. HANKINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN E. HUSBAND, individually and as manager, Little Snake Resource Area, 

U.S. BLM, and

AXIS STEEL, INC.,

Defendants.

 

ORDER 

 

Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer

This civil action comes before the court on: (1) Plaintiff Mr. Hankins’ tendered

Amended Complaint (filed February 29, 2012) (Doc. # 47); (2) Defendant Axis Steel, Inc.'s

Request for Dismissal as a Result of the Filing of an Amended Complaint Omitting Axis Steel,

Inc., and Plaintiff’s Failure to Respon[d] to Motion to Dismiss” (filed March 26, 2012) (Doc. #

54); and (3) the “Motion for More Definite Statement Pursuant to Rule 12(e)” filed on March

14, 2012 by Defendants BLM and Husband (Doc. # 51). Pursuant to the Order of Reference

dated October 21, 2011 (Doc. # 9) and the memoranda dated March 14, 2012 (Doc. # 52)

and March 26, 2012 (Doc. # 55), the Motions were referred to the Magistrate Judge. The

court has reviewed the Motions, the tendered Amended Complaint, the entire case file, and

the applicable law and is sufficiently advised in the premises. 

Mr. Hankins tendered his Amended Complaint without filing a motion seeking leave of

court to file an amended pleading. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1), a “party may amend

its “pleading once as a matter of course within: (A) 21 days after serving it, or (B) if the

pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a

Case 1:11-cv-02224-WJM-CBS Document 56 Filed 03/26/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f),

whichever is earlier.” “In all other cases, a party may amend its pleading only with the

opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Here, no

responsive pleading has yet been filed and more than 21 days has passed since Mr. Hankins’

original Complaint was served on the Defendants. Thus, if Mr. Hankins seeks to amend his

original Complaint, he must file with the court a motion for leave to amend, explain why he is

seeking to amend his pleading, explain why he has named each Defendant, and attach a

copy of the proposed amended complaint. The court will strike Mr. Hankins’ tendered

Amended Complaint that was filed without permission. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Mr. Hankins’ tendered Amended Complaint (filed February 29, 2012) (Doc. #

47) is STRICKEN. 

2. Defendant Axis Steel, Inc.'s Request for Dismissal as a Result of the Filing of

an Amended Complaint Omitting Axis Steel, Inc., and Plaintiff’s Failure to Respon[d] to

Motion to Dismiss” (filed March 26, 2012) (Doc. # 54) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

3. The “Motion for More Definite Statement Pursuant to Rule 12(e)” filed on March

14, 2012 by Defendants BLM and Husband (Doc. # 51), directed to the tendered Amended

Complaint, is DENIED AS MOOT. 

DATED at Denver, Colorado this 26th day of March, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Craig B. Shaffer 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 1:11-cv-02224-WJM-CBS Document 56 Filed 03/26/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2