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 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Schuyler McHenry, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Experian Information Solutions 

Incorporated, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-15-02356-PHX-JJT

ORDER 

 At issue is Plaintiff’s Notice of Settlement as to Equifax Information Services, 

LLC, only (Doc. 21). Plaintiff filed the Notice on December 22, 2015, and advised the 

court the parties anticipate filing a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice as to Defendant 

Equifax within 60 days of the Notice date. That same day, the Court issued an Order 

advising the parties that the settlement constituted an accord which has extinguished the 

underlying claims as between Plaintiff and Equifax only. (Doc. 24). The Court also 

ordered that the matter would be dismissed with prejudice as to Equifax only, 60 days 

after the docketing of the order unless one of the parties filed a stipulation to dismiss 

prior to that date. (Doc. 24.) The 60 days expired no later than Monday, February 22, 

2016, but no party filed a stipulation for dismissal. The Court therefore will dismiss this 

matter with prejudice as to Defendant Equifax. 

 Also at issue is Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend/Correct Complaint (Doc. 49), filed 

February 26, 2016. The Court will deny the motion with leave to refile once Plaintiff has 

Case 2:15-cv-02356-JJT Document 50 Filed 03/01/16 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 

complied with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and this Court’s Local Rules of 

Practice. 

 In his motion, Plaintiff moves under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 (a)(1) for an amendment as 

a matter of course. Rule 15(a)(1) provides in relevant part that a party may amend its 

pleading once as a matter of course within 21 days after serving it, or, if the pleading is 

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

pleading. The Complaint was a pleading to which a responsive pleading – the Answer – 

was required. The last two Defendants to file their Answers did so on January 11, 2015. 

Under Rule 15 (a) (1), then, the latest date Plaintiff could move for an amendment as a 

matter of course was February 1, 2016. Plaintiff did not file his Motion to amend or 

correct the Complaint until February 26, 2016. Plaintiff therefore is out of time for a 

motion to amend as a matter of course. 

 Plaintiff may file a motion to amend pursuant to Rule 15 (a) (2), but must meet all 

requirements of that rule if he chooses to do so. Under Rule 15 (a) (2), Plaintiff may 

amend his pleading only with the opposing parties’ written consent or with the Court’s 

leave, which leave should be freely given when justice so requires. The Court will require 

Plaintiff to state in any Rule 15 (a) (2) motion the positions of all remaining Defendants. 

 IT IS ORDERED dismissing this matter with prejudice as to Defendant Equifax 

only. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend/Correct 

Complaint (Doc. 49) with leave to refile in compliance with the applicable federal and 

local rules. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that should Plaintiff refile his Motion to Amend, any 

such motion must contain the positions of all remaining Defendants as to the motion. 

 Dated this 1st day of March, 2016. 

 

 Honorable John J. Tuchi 

 United States District Judge 

Case 2:15-cv-02356-JJT Document 50 Filed 03/01/16 Page 2 of 2