united-states civil-procedure federal-courts
Amending Motions
<p>CM/ECF (The Electronic Filing System used by federal courts) has a section for "amended motions". What are the circumstances under which a party could amend a motion? In federal court, can one amend a motion without leave if the other party has not yet responded?</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>What are the circumstances under which a party could amend a motion?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>When circumstances have changed, since filing of the motion, in a way that leaving the motion uncorrected or outdated may lead to confusion or cause a "waste of judicial resources", respectively.</p>

<p>For instance, suppose <em>A</em> denounces in his motion that <em>B</em> has not responded to a subpoena for records. Immediately after filing the motion, <em>B</em> submits essentially trash to pretend he ultimately complied with the subpoena. In that case, <em>A</em> should amend his motion to update <em>state of affairs</em>: that <em>B</em> only produced trash. Doing so will preclude <em>B</em>'s misleading allegation that "<em>the motion should be denied as moot because B has already responded to the subpoena</em>". Now <em>A</em> may want the court to scrutinize more in detail <em>B</em>'s pseudo-response and, accordingly, pursue additional or different relief.</p>

<p>Another situation that warrants an amendment is where the moving party made a mistake that renders the substance or purpose of his motion confusing. Not doing so affords <em>B</em> the opportunity to defeat the motion merely by disproving <em>A</em>'s inaccuracies.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>can one amend a motion without leave if the other party has not yet responded?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I am not much knowledgeable of FRCP, but my "educated guess" is in the affirmative except for some specific types of motions or on belatedness of the amendment.</p>

<p>In fact, it sounds wasteful to call the court's attention regarding an obsolete motion on which the opposing party might not have even spent any effort yet. I doubt that FRCP are more stringent than states' procedural law in this regard.</p>

<p>That being said, see <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-dcd-1_06-cv-00838/pdf/USCOURTS-dcd-1_06-cv-00838-0.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a> for an example of ruling on a motion for leave to amend [motion for relief from order]. </p>

<p>A need <em>for leave</em> seemingly derives from belatedness [of the motion to amend] or stems from the nature of the underlying motion, not from the mere necessity to make the amendment. See <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_60" rel="nofollow noreferrer">FRCP 60(a) and Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules -1946 Amendment</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>after an appeal has been docketed in the appellate court and while it
  is pending, such a mistake may be corrected only with the appellate
  <strong>court's leave</strong></p>
  
  <p>[...]</p>
  
  <p>a motion for new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence is
  permitted within ten days after the entry of the judgment, or <strong>after
  that time upon leave of the court</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>(emphasis added)</p>
