Langendorf v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company, S.I.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
KENNETH S. LANGENDORF, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
vs. 	) 	Case No. 4:25-cv-01732-MTS
)
AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL 	)
INSURANCE COMPANY, S.I., 	)
)
Defendant. 	)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On review of this removed case, the Court concludes that a few procedural issues
require addressing. Defendant filed an answer, Doc. [9], followed by a partial motion to
dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), seeking dismissal of only Count
III, Doc. [9]. The filing of an answer followed by a partial motion to dismiss is, at least,
procedurally irregular. 	See Hammer v. Post 4, LLC, 4:24-cv-0105-MTS, 2024 WL
1655391, at *1 (E.D. Mo. Apr. 17, 2024). 	In response, Plaintiff filed a Notice of
Voluntary Dismissal of Count III, which purports to unilaterally dismiss Count III
without prejudice. 	Doc. [11]. 	Courts generally hold, though, that it is improper for a
plaintiff to unilaterally dismiss a single claim. 	See Paglin v. Saztec Int’l, Inc., 834 F.
Supp. 1184, 1189 (W.D. Mo. 1993); accord Walker v. State, 158 F.4th 971, 982 (9th Cir.
2025); In re Esteva, 60 F.4th 664, 678 (11th Cir. 2023). 	Plaintiff also filed a Reply to
Defendant’s Affirmative Defenses, Doc. [12], which the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
do not permit without leave of court. 	See Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a)(7); see also Irwin v. Zoll
Case: 4:25-cv-01732-MTS Doc. #: 13 Filed: 12/10/25 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

- 2 -
Lab’y Servs., LLC, 781 F. Supp. 3d 712, 719 (S.D. Iowa 2025); Cowling v. Deep Vein
Coal Co., 183 F.2d 652, 655 (7th Cir. 1950).
Given these procedural issues, the Court will require Plaintiff to file an amended
complaint for the sake of a clean record. 	The Court will provide Defendant with the
usual time to file its required response to the amended complaint. 	See Fed. R. Civ. P.
15(a)(3). 	After Defendant files its required response, the Court will set this matter for a
Rule 16 conference. Going forward, the parties should comply with the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint in this
matter no later than Wednesday, December 24, 2025. 	Defendant shall have the usual
time to file its required response to the amended complaint.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Count III,
Doc. [9], is DENIED without prejudice.
Dated this 10th day of December 2025.
MATTHEW T. SCHELP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case: 4:25-cv-01732-MTS Doc. #: 13 Filed: 12/10/25 Page: 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>