IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
April 11, 2007
RACHEL SCARBROUGH, PLAINTIFF,
ILLINOIS DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Proud, Magistrate Judge
Before the Court are defendant's unopposed motion for an extension of time to file its answer or other responsive pleading out of time (Doc. 9), and motion for leave to file a "combined partial motion to dismiss and partial answer and affirmative defenses." (Doc. 10).
As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that defendant's initial motion was not really necessary, as plaintiff did not object to defendant filing an answer or responsive pleading outside the usual time frame, and defendant was not in default.
Insofar as defendant desires to file a combined partial answer and motion for partial dismissal, filing a motion to dismiss postpones the time for filing an answer until 10 days after the Court rules on the motion. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(4). Filing a partial answer could be confusing, particularly if the motion to dismiss were denied, because an amended answer would be required. Furthermore, the filing of a motion to dismiss does not stay the Court from proceeding with ministerial tasks, such as entering a scheduling and discovery order.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendants motion for an extension of time to file its answer or other responsive pleading out of time (Doc. 9) is GRANTED, but defendant's motion to file a combined partial answer and motion for partial dismissal (Doc. 10) is DENIED. On or before April 17, 2007, defendant shall file its motion to dismiss, thereby automatically postponing the deadline for filing an answer. In the event defendant opts not to file a motion to dismiss, it must file its answer by April 17, 2007.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
CLIFFORD J. PROUD U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.