Ortiz

Ortiz v. Walmart, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJuly 13, 20213:20-cv-02219California1,078 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

21 On May 28, 2020, Plaintiff Rebecca Ortiz (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint in San 22 Diego Superior Court against Defendant Walmart, Inc. (“Defendant”) alleging negligence 23 and premises liability for injuries she allegedly sustained while shopping at Defendant’s 24 store located at 2540 Rockwood Avenue in Calexico, California. (Dkt. No. 1-2, Compl.) 25 On November 13, 2020, Defendant removed this action to this Court. (Dkt. No. 1.) On 26 April 26, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended 27 complaint and directed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within five days of the Court’s order. (Dkt. No. 17.) However, Plaintiff filed the amended complaint nearly a month later on May 27, 2021. (Dkt. No. 18.) Because the amended complaint was filed late, Defendant filed the instant motion to strike the amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) and the motion is fully briefed. (Dkt. Nos. 19, 22, 23.) DISCUSSION Rule 12(f) provides that the court “may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.