In the appropriate circumstances, Rule 36(b) provides for the withdrawal or amendment of admissions. This section reads as follows: Subject to the provision of Rule 16 governing amendment of a pre-trial order, the court may permit withdrawal or amendment when the presentation of the merits of the action will be subserved thereby and the party who obtained the admission fails to satisfy the court that withdrawal or amendment will prejudice that party in maintaining the action or defense on the merits. When a party seeks leave to file untimely answers, the test to be applied by the Court is whether permitting the party to answer will aid in the presentation of the merits of the action and whether prejudice will accrue to the propounding party. Davis v. Noufal, 142 F.R.D. 258 (D.D.C.1992) (<HOLDING>); McClanahan v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 144 F.R.D.
holding portions of summary judgment motion in abeyance pending an evidentiary hearing holding that a motion to withdraw a guilty plea was not pending because nothing was left for the court to decide holding plaintiff could withdraw admissions despite pending motion by defendants for summary judgment holding that district court has discretion under appropriate circumstances to rule on summary judgment motion before addressing pending class certification motion holding that the trial court did not err by granting defendants motion for summary judgment