Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01083/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01083-3/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRIAN REED, )

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

CITY OF MODESTO et al., ) 

 )

)

Defendants. )

 )

11-cv-1083 AWI-GSA

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED

COMPLAINT

(Document 33)

INTRODUCTION

On October 22, 2012, Plaintiff, Brian Reed (“Plaintiff”) filed a Motion to Amend the

Complaint to add additional claims. On November 7, 2012, Defendants City of Modesto,

Michael Harden, Ron Ziya and Caelli Koehler filed a non-opposition to the motion. In light of

the filing of the non-opposition, the court has determined that this matter is suitable for decision

without oral argument pursuant to Local Rule 230(c). Having considered all written materials

submitted, Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED. The hearing scheduled for November 30, 2012 at

9:30 is VACATED.

DISCUSSION

Under Rule 15(a), a party may amend his complaint once “as a matter of course,” and

without leave of court, before a response has been filed. Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(1); Bonin v.

Calderon, 59 F.3d 815, 845 (9th Cir. 1995). However, in all other circumstances, a party may

1

Case 1:11-cv-01083-AWI-GSA Document 36 Filed 11/13/12 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

amend its pleading with the opposing party’s written consent or by obtaining leave to amend by

the court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 15(a)(2) provides that a court “should

freely give leave [to amend] when justice so requires.” The United States Supreme Court has

stated:

[i]n the absence of any apparent or declared reason – such as undue delay, bad faith or 

dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by

amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of

allowance of the amendment, futility of amendment, etc. – the leave sought should, as the

rules require, be “freely given.”

Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). 

This policy is “to be applied with extreme liberality.” Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon,

Inc., 316 F. 3d 1048, 1052 (9 2003) (citations omitted). th

Here, Plaintiff has moved to amend the complaint to add additional state law claims. 

Defendants have filed a non-opposition to the motion. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2),

Plaintiff shall be permitted to file an amended complaint.

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, for the above reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to

file an Amended complaint is GRANTED. For purposes of clarifying the docket, the Clerk of

the Court shall file Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint as a separate docket entry. (Doc. 33-1). 

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is deemed filed as of the date of this order. Defendants’ Answer

to the Amended Complaint is due no later than 14 days after the service of the amended pleading. 

Fed. R. Civ. P 15(a)(3). The hearing scheduled for November 30, 2012 at 9:30 is VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 13, 2012 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:11-cv-01083-AWI-GSA Document 36 Filed 11/13/12 Page 2 of 2