Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-02332/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-02332-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

ORDER RE: ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS— No. C-07-02332 RMW

MAG

E-filed on: 3/19/08 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

WILLIAM B. BURLEIGH

Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF MONTEREY, A Public Entity,

and DOES 1 to 20

Defendants.

No. C-07-02332 RMW

ORDER RE: ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS 

[Re Docket No. 63]

On March 5, 2008, plaintiff William Burleigh, proceeding pro se, filed a document titled

"Burleigh's Amendment to Petition to Include Defendants in Lieu of Doe Defendants." Docket No. 63.

A day later, he filed a document titled "Possible Error in Procedure," Docket No. 61, acknowledging

that his filing to add defendants should have been preceded by a motion for leave to amend the

complaint to add such defendants. 

Plaintiff is correct that he must, at this point in the litigation, either obtain the consent of the

County of Monterey or seek leave of the court to file an amended pleading. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a).

While Rule 15 states that "leave shall be freely given when justice so requires," other parties to the

litigation are permitted to oppose a request for leave to amend. Cf. California Architectural Bldg.

Products, Inc. v. Franciscan Ceramics, Inc., 818 F.2d 1466, 1472 (9th Cir. 1987) ("Valid reasons for

Case 5:07-cv-02332-RMW Document 67 Filed 03/19/08 Page 1 of 3
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

ORDER RE: ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS— No. C-07-02332 RMW

MAG 2

denying leave to amend include undue delay, bad faith, prejudice, and futility.") (citing Foman v. Davis,

371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962)). Should plaintiff still wish to add defendants, plaintiff shall file a motion for

leave to amend his complaint noticed on the appropriate schedule as set forth in N.D. Cal. Local Rule

7-2 within twenty (20) days of the date of this order. 

DATED: 3/18/08

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 5:07-cv-02332-RMW Document 67 Filed 03/19/08 Page 2 of 3
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

ORDER RE: ADDITIONAL DEFENDANTS— No. C-07-02332 RMW

MAG 3

A copy of this order was mailed on 3/19/08 to:

Plaintiff (pro se):

William Burleigh

1 Paso Hondo

Carmel Valley, CA 93924

Counsel for Defendants:

Frank G. Tiesen 

Office of the County Counsel 

County of Monterey 

168 W. Alisal Street, Third Floor 

Salinas, CA 93901-2680 

Email: tiesenf@co.monterey.ca.us 

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this order to co-counsel, as necessary.

DATED: 3/19/08 /s/ MAG

Chambers of Judge Whyte

Case 5:07-cv-02332-RMW Document 67 Filed 03/19/08 Page 3 of 3