MARCOS DANIEL SANCHEZ v. SYNCHRONY BANK N.A.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed a pro se plaintiff's combined filing containing multiple motions and an amended complaint, ruling that the filing must be treated as a Second Amended Complaint rather than a motion. The court granted leave to amend, denied the other procedural requests, and ordered the plaintiff to show cause for failing to respond to the defendant's motion to dismiss.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Granting leave to file a Second Amended Complaint and construing ECF No. 18 as such“The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s request to file a Second Amended Complaint and construes the document filed at ECF No. 18 to be that Second Amended Complaint.” | agree with court The court correctly applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), which allows a plaintiff to amend a complaint with the court's leave. Construing a pro se litigant's combined filing as an amended complaint is a standard and appropriate procedural measure to ensure the merits are addressed. |
Denying the request for entry of judgment under Rule 54(b)“Rule 54(b) is inappropriate since it is only applicable in situations where a final judgment has been entered as to some claims or defendants, but not others.” | agree with court The court correctly identified that Rule 54(b) is inapplicable because no final judgment had been entered on any claims or parties. The citation to SG Cowen Sec. Corp. v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for N. Dist. of CA supports this interpretation. |
Ordering Plaintiff to show cause for failure to respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss“The Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE for failure to respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss by September 21, 2026. If Plaintiff fails to respond by September 21, 2026, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion to dismiss.” | agree with court The court appropriately cited Ghazali v. Moran and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) to support the proposition that failure to respond to a motion to dismiss can result in the motion being granted. Providing a deadline to show cause is a standard procedural step before dismissing a case for failure to prosecute or respond. |
Denying Plaintiff's other requests (extension of time, discovery, etc.)“Finally, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's other requests.” | agree with court The court denied the remaining requests, including the motion for extension of time and discovery requests, largely because the filing was procedurally improper (combined motions) and the court was construing the document as an amended complaint. This is a reasonable exercise of discretion given the procedural deficiencies. |
The order itself: sound — The order correctly identifies the procedural deficiencies in the plaintiff's combined filing and applies the appropriate rules to resolve them. It correctly construes the filing as an amended complaint, denies the inapplicable Rule 54(b) motion, and sets a clear deadline for the plaintiff to respond to the pending motion to dismiss, citing relevant Ninth Circuit precedent and Federal Rules.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 13 MARCOS DANIEL SANCHEZ, Case No. 26-cv-03167-BAS-VET 14 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND 15 v. DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION (ECF No. 18) 16 SYNCHRONY BANK N.A., 17 Defendant. 18 19 Plaintiff Marcos Daniel Sanchez, acting pro per, files a motion (“Motion”) (ECF No. 20 18), labeling it a: 21 1. Counter Motion for Entry of Judgment under the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 22 54(b); 23 2. First Amended Complaint; 24 3. Amended Motion for Extension of Time to file Response/Reply; 25 4. Motion for Leave to Amend; 26 5. Supplemental Motion for Discovery Interrogatories; 27 6. Amended Motion to Amend/Correct Request for Documents. 28 1 As a preliminary matter, each motion must be filed separately. It is not appropriate 2 to combine multiple requests in such fashion. See CivLR 5.1.l (“All documents submitted 3 for filing must be filed and captioned separately.”); see also CivLR 7.1.f.1 (“Each motion 4 or other request for ruling by the Court must include within it a Memorandum of Points 5 and Authorities in support of the motion and a caption listing the nature of the motion, 6 hearing date and time, and the judge who will hear the motion. Where appropriate, a 7 separate or a joint statement of material facts, required declarations or affidavits, or 8 exhibits, must be supplied.”). 9 Furthermore, it is unclear what Plaintiff is opposing or replying to. Lastly, Rule 10 54(b) is inappropriate since it is only applicable in situations where a final judgment has 11 been entered as to some claims or defendants, but not others. SG Cowen Sec. Corp. v. U.S. 12 Dist. Ct. for N. Dist. of CA, 189 F.3d 909, 913 (9th Cir. 1999). That is not the situation in 13 this case. 14 Finally, to the extent Plaintiff is requesting permission to file a Second Amended 15 Complaint, that request is granted. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(2) (permitting a plaintiff to 16 amend his or her complaint with the court’s leave). The Court will construe ECF No. 18 17 as the First Amended Complaint, and not as any further motion. The Court will consider 18 Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 19) separately. 19 Thus, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Plaintiff’s Motion. 20 (ECF No. 18.) 21 More specifically, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s request to file a Second Amended 22 Complaint and construes the document filed at ECF No. 18 to be that Second Amended 23 Complaint. Relatedly, Defendants have moved to dismiss this Second Amended 24 Complaint (ECF No. 19), and Plaintiff has failed to respond to Defendants’ motion to 25 dismiss. 26 The Court hereby ORDERS Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE for failure to respond to 27 Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss by September 21, 2026. If Plaintiff fails to respond by 28 September 21, 2026, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Ghazali v. 1 || Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir.1995) (holding the failure to file an opposition to a motion 2 || to dismiss is grounds for granting the motion); see Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). 3 Finally, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's other requests. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 ~ 6 || DATED: September 14, 2026 (yatta Bahar te 7 H n. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge United States District Court 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 48