Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-00470/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-00470-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights 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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

NOT FOR PUBLICATION 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

KHLOOD KHALIH SALAH, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

CONTRA COSTA CHILDREN AND FAMILY 

SERVICES (CFS), ET AL., 

Defendants. 

CASE NO. 18-cv-00470-YGR 

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

FOR LEAVE TO FILE PROPOSED THIRD 

AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Dkt. No. 88 

The Court having considered the papers filed in support of and in opposition to Plaintiff 

Khlood Salah’s Motion for Leave to File Proposed Third Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 88), and 

good cause appearing therefore, the motion is GRANTED.

1

 

Motions for leave to amend are liberally granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) (“Leave to amend a 

complaint should be freely given in the absence of undue delay, bad faith, undue prejudice to the 

opposing party, repeated failure to cure deficiencies, or futility.”); Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 

182 (1962) (federal policy favors determination of cases on their merits). 

Here, the opposition does not raise undue delay, bad faith, or repeated failure to cure 

deficiencies, but instead raises questions of the sufficiency and clarity of the allegations, as well as 

the defense of collateral estoppel. The Court construes this to be an argument that the amendment 

would be futile. The Court does not find plaintiff’s proposed amendment to be futile on its face 

given that federal civil rights actions addressing conduct in the course of state dependency 

proceedings may be alleged under appropriate circumstances. Cf., e.g., Hardwick v. Cty. of 

1

 Plaintiff’s request to dismiss without prejudice defendants previously named -- David 

Twa, Constance Bravos—is GRANTED. (Motion, Dkt. No. 88, at 5:13-15.) Plaintiff indicated in 

her motion that she also wished to dismiss defendant Kathy Gallagher (id.), but allegations against 

Gallagher remain in the Third Amended Complaint, so no dismissal will be entered against her. 

Plaintiff is directed to clarify this discrepancy forthwith. 

Case 4:18-cv-00470-YGR Document 96 Filed 03/25/20 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 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

Orange, 844 F.3d 1112, 1114–16 (9th Cir. 2017). The Court makes no finding as to whether the 

allegations here are sufficient or definite enough to state such claims. Rather, the Court finds that 

the issues raised by County defendants’ opposition are more appropriately addressed in a later 

pleading or summary judgment motion. 

However, the Court cautions plaintiff that failure to allege a clear, sufficient, nonconclusory basis in law and fact for liability as to each defendant may result in dismissal of her 

complaint. To the extent the parties can resolve disputes about the sufficiency of the operative 

complaint short of motion practice, they are encouraged to meet and confer and stipulate to further 

amendment of the operative complaint. 

Plaintiff shall file her Third Amended Complaint on the docket no later than April 7, 2020. 

County defendants (Contra Costa County; Suzanne Porter, Vanessa Rezos, Tandrea 

Thysell, Chau Nguyen, Peggy Henderson, John Boylan, Brittanie Mills, Joan Miller, Kathy Marsh, 

Kathy Gallagher) shall file their response to the Third Amended Complaint no later than April 28, 

2020. 

This order terminates Docket No. 88. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 25, 2020 

 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

Case 4:18-cv-00470-YGR Document 96 Filed 03/25/20 Page 2 of 2