Bradley Caston v. Wright State University

• Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
• Decided: February 11, 2026
• Docket: 3:25-cv-00100
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

BRADLEY CASTON,

Plaintiff, Case No. 3:25-cv-100

vs.

WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY, District Judge Michael J. Newman, Magistrate Judge Peter B. Silvain, Jr. Defendant. ______________________________________________________________________________

ORDER: (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE HIS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (Doc. No. 6); (2) INSTRUCTING THE CLERK TO SEPARATELY DOCKET THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (Doc. No. 6-1); AND (3) DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. No. 4) ______________________________________________________________________________

This civil case is before the Court upon Defendant Wright State University’s motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 4), Plaintiff Bradley Caston’s memorandum in opposition (Doc. No. 7), and Defendants’ reply (Doc. No. 8). Additionally, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file his first amended complaint (Doc. No. 6), Defendant has filed a memorandum in opposition (Doc. No. 9), and Plaintiff has filed his reply (Doc. No. 10). Thus, the motions are ripe for this Court’s review. Upon good cause shown, review of the record, in the interests of justice and efficiency, and because amendments to a complaint are freely granted as justice so requires, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2); see generally Roberts v. Autoalliance Int’l, Inc., No. 92-1447, 1993 WL 210717, at *6 (6th Cir. June 15, 1993). The Court INSTRUCTS the Clerk to separately docket the first amended complaint. Doc. No. 6- 1. Given the Court’s ruling, Defendant’s pending motion to dismiss is premature and

DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED. February 11, 2026 s/Michael J. Newman Hon. Michael J. Newman United States District Judge