Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-01071/USCOURTS-cand-4_18-cv-01071-4/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 California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANTHONY ECONOMUS,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 18-cv-01071-HSG 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR 

LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED 

COMPLAINT

Re: Dkt. No. 35

On March 15, 2018, Plaintiff Anthony Economus filed a motion for leave to file a Second 

Amended Complaint, in which Plaintiff includes a negligence cause of action. Dkt. No. 35. The 

motion is unopposed by Defendants. Dkt. No. 41. The motion is now pending before the Court.1

Under Federal Rule of Procedure 15(a)(2), “leave to amend shall be freely granted ‘when 

justice so requires.’” Townsend v. Univ. of Alaska, 543 F.3d 478, 485 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2)). “This policy is to be applied with extreme liberality.” Eminence 

Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir. 2003) (internal quotation marks 

omitted). The five factors relevant to determining proper amendment are (1) bad faith, (2) undue 

delay, (3) prejudice to the opposing party, (4) futility of amendment, and (5) previous 

amendments. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962); see also Wash. State Republican Party 

v. Wash. State Grange, 676 F.3d 784, 797 (9th Cir. 2012) (same factors). The Court weighs 

prejudice to the opposing party most heavily. Eminence Capital, 316 F.3d at 1052 (9th Cir. 2003). 

“Absent prejudice, or a strong showing of any of the remaining Foman factors, there exists a 

presumption under Rule 15(a) in favor of granting leave to amend.” Id. (emphasis in original). As 

 

1 The Court finds this matter appropriate for disposition without oral argument and the matter is 

deemed submitted. See Civil L.R. 7-1(b).

Case 4:18-cv-01071-HSG Document 44 Filed 10/26/18 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 California

the motion is unopposed, the presumption in favor of granting leave to amend applies. The Court 

thus GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion. The second amended complaint must be filed by November 2, 

2018.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

10/26/2018

Case 4:18-cv-01071-HSG Document 44 Filed 10/26/18 Page 2 of 2