Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-01304/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-01304-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 230
Nature of Suit: Rent, Lease, Ejectment
Cause of Action: 28:1331(a) Fed. Question: Real Property

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CHRISTOPHER MURAD, et al., 

Defendants. /

No. C 06-1304 SBA 

ORDER

[Docket No. 188]

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended

Complaint. 

BACKGROUND

This is an action for ejectment, trespass, and injunctive relief. Plaintiff seeks to end all

unauthorized use of the United States' real property at Pleasure Cove Marina, located at Lake Berryessa,

Napa County, California. Prior to the filing of the original and First Amended Complaint, Mark and

Janette Caruso were taking voluntary steps to remove their mobile home and personal property from the

land. As such, the Carusos were not named as Defendants. Lucero Decl. at ¶ 5. However, Plaintiff has

since learned that the Carusos donated their mobile home to the California Water Posse, and that the

mobile home has not been and would not be removed. Id. at ¶ 6. The California Water Posse is an

entity which is owned and operated by the Half Moon Bay Coastside Foundation; the Executive Director

of the California Water Posse is Oscar Braun. Id.

Accordingly, Plaintiff seeks to file a second amended complaint adding the Carusos, the

California Water Posse, the Half Moon Bay Coastside Foundation, and Oscar Braun as Defendants. Id.

at ¶ 7. Defendants have not filed an opposition to the Motion.

DISCUSSION

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) provides that, after a first amendment, leave of court is

required to file an amended pleading. The Rule is to be applied liberally in favor of amendments and,

Case 4:06-cv-01304-SBA Document 214 Filed 10/30/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

in general, leave shall be freely given when justice so requires. Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc.,

316 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir. 2003); Janicki Logging Co. v. Mateer, 42 F.3d 561, 566 (9th Cir. 1994).

However, a district court need not grant leave to amend where the amendment: 1) prejudices the

opposing party; 2) is sought in bad faith; 3) produces an undue delay in litigation; or 4) is futile.

Jackson v. Bank of Hawaii, 902 F.2d 1385, 1387 (9th Cir. 1990); Moore v. Kayport Package Express,

885 F.2d 531, 538 (9th Cir. 1989). Of these factors, prejudice to the opposing party is the most

important. Jackson, 902 F.2d at 1387 (citing Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 401 U.S.

321, 330-31 (1971)). There is no evidence that any of the above factors are present in this case. 

Further, under this Court's standing orders, "[t]he failure of the opposing party to file a

memorandum of points and authorities in opposition to any motion shall constitute a consent to the

granting of the motion." Accordingly, the Court deems Defendants to have consented to Plaintiff's

Motion.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint

is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 10/30/06 SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:06-cv-01304-SBA Document 214 Filed 10/30/06 Page 2 of 2