Haass v. Hopkins Manufacturing Corporation
- Vincent Briccetti
- 7:21-cv-01290
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Haass v. Hopkins Manufacturing Corporation, Judge Briccetti ordered Haass to say whether he will amend his complaint before the dismissal motion proceeds.
Thomas Haass and Hopkins Manufacturing Corporation; the order required Haass to choose whether to amend his complaint and set deadlines for further filings.
What happened
Haass v. Hopkins Manufacturing Corporation involves a motion by Hopkins Manufacturing Corporation to dismiss Thomas Haass’s complaint. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
The court ordered Haass to notify it by May 5, 2021, whether he intends to file an amended complaint or rely on his existing complaint. If he chooses to amend, he must do so within 14 days after notifying the court. The order did not decide the motion to dismiss.
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti stated that, if Haass relies on the existing complaint, the motion will proceed under the regular schedule and the court is unlikely to allow another amendment to address deficiencies identified in the motion. If Haass amends, Hopkins Manufacturing Corporation has 21 days to answer, move to dismiss the amended complaint, or state that it relies on its original motion.
The detailed version
- Haass v. Hopkins Manufacturing Corporation · No. 7:21-cv-01290
- Vincent Briccetti
- Apr. 26, 2021
Background
On April 23, 2021, Hopkins Manufacturing Corporation moved to dismiss Thomas Haass’s complaint. The order does not describe the claims or the arguments supporting dismissal.
Court’s Order
The court ordered Haass to notify the court by May 5, 2021, whether he would:
1. file an amended complaint in response to the motion to dismiss; or 2. rely on the complaint that was the subject of the motion.
If Haass chose not to amend, the motion to dismiss would proceed in the regular course. The court stated that it was unlikely to grant Haass another opportunity to amend to address deficiencies made apparent by the fully briefed arguments in the motion. The deadlines for opposing and reply papers would be governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Civil Rules unless the court ordered otherwise.
If Haass chose to amend, he had to file the amended complaint within 14 days after notifying the court of that intent. Within 21 days after the amendment, Hopkins Manufacturing Corporation could answer the amended complaint, file a motion to dismiss it, or notify the court that it relied on its initially filed motion to dismiss.
Disposition
Judge Vincent L. Briccetti did not grant or deny the motion to dismiss. The order set a procedure and deadlines for deciding whether Haass would amend his complaint and how the defendant could respond.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.