Summary
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana adopted the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation allowing Plaintiff Harrison Shaw, Jr. to amend his Title VII complaint. The Court directed the clerk to strike and re-docket the second amended complaint, which would become the operative complaint, and dismissed the pending motion to dismiss as moot.
Holdings
- When no objection or only a partial objection is made to an R&R, the district court reviews the unobjected portions for clear error.
- Because Shaw had already amended once as a matter of course and had not yet obtained written consent or leave of court, his second amended complaint was impermissible when filed before adoption of the R&R.
- After adopting the R&R and thereby granting leave to amend, the court directed that the prematurely filed second amended complaint be struck and re-docketed as of the order's date; once re-docketed, it would be the operative complaint and the pending motion to dismiss would be dismissed as moot.
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court should adopt the unobjected-to Report and Recommendation recommending that Shaw be permitted to file a second amended complaint.
- Whether Shaw's second amended complaint, filed before the district court adopted the R&R and without prior leave of court, was permissible.
- What procedural action should be taken regarding the prematurely filed second amended complaint and the pending motion to dismiss.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (1)
- Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…