Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-02506/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-02506-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: Americans with Disabilities Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1 06cv2506

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TRIPLE AAA ASSOCIATION FOR

CHILDREN WITH DEVELOPMENTAL

DISABILITIES SUING ON BEHALF OF

MEMBER DEMETRIO,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 06CV2506 BTM (LSP)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT

[Doc. #5]

vs.

RODRIGUEZ CLAUDIA dba

ARMANDOS TACO SHOP 2, et al.,

Defendants.

On November 15, 2006, Plaintiff filed a complaint alleging discriminatory practices in

public accommodations encountered by Plaintiff’s member Demetrio upon visiting Armandos

Taco Shop 2. On April 5, 2007, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint. On May 7,

2007, Plaintiff filed a motion to amend its complaint in order to add the landlord of the subject

property and to clarify the pleadings, including correcting the named parties. No brief was

filed in opposition to Plaintiff’s motion. The motion came on for hearing on June 15, 2007

and was taken under submission. The Court finds that this matter is suitable for

determination without oral argument pursuant to CivLR 7.1(d)(1).

Leave to amend a complaint is to be “freely given when justice so requires.” Fed. R.

Civ. P. 15(a); accord Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1051-52 (9th Cir.

2003). In the absence of any reason such as undue delay, bad faith or, most importantly,

Case 3:06-cv-02506-BTM-LSP Document 9 Filed 06/19/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2 06cv2506

prejudice to the opposing party, “there exists a presumption under Rule 15(a) in favor of

granting leave to amend.” Id. at 1052. The Court finds that the newly added Defendants will

suffer no prejudice from being added at this early stage of the litigation, and the previously

named Defendant has not opposed the motion. Since no reason exists to deny Plaintiff’s

request, the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to amend its complaint. Plaintiff is

directed to file a First Amended Complaint, in the form submitted to the Court as an exhibit

to its motion, within 10 days of entry of this order and to serve that complaint upon all

Defendants without delay.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: June 18, 2007

Hon. Barry Ted Moskowitz

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cv-02506-BTM-LSP Document 9 Filed 06/19/07 Page 2 of 2