Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00133/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00133-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Fraud

---

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 

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Paul Short and Barbara Short, a married 

couple, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

Chase Home Finance LLC; and John and 

Jane Doe, a married couple, 

Defendants.

No. CV-11-133-PHX-DGC

ORDER 

 Defendant Chase Home Finance LLC has filed a motion to dismiss the complaint 

pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Doc. 6. In response, 

Plaintiffs have filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint pursuant to Rule 15. 

Doc. 7. 

 Rule 15 makes clear that the Court “should freely give leave [to amend] when 

justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). This policy in favor of leave to amend 

must not only be heeded, Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962), it must be applied 

with extreme liberality, Owens v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., 244 F.3d 708, 

880 (9th Cir. 2001). This liberality “is not dependent on whether the amendment will add 

causes of action or parties.” DCD Programs, Ltd. v. Leighton, 833 F.2d 183, 186 (9th 

Cir. 1987). 

 Pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2), and in the interests of justice, the Court will grant the 

Case 2:11-cv-00133-DGC Document 8 Filed 03/15/11 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

motion for leave to amend. Plaintiffs shall file the proposed amended complaint (see

Doc. 7-1) by March 25, 2011. The motion to dismiss the original complaint will be 

denied as moot. 

IT IS ORDERED:

 1. Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file an amended complaint (Doc. 7) is 

granted. 

 2. Plaintiffs shall filed the proposed amended complaint (see Doc. 7-1) by 

March 25, 2011. 

 3. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the original complaint (Doc. 6) is denied as 

moot. 

 Dated this 15th day of March, 2011. 

Case 2:11-cv-00133-DGC Document 8 Filed 03/15/11 Page 2 of 2