Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-01401/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-01401-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTINA L. ALEXANDER, Civil No. 12cv1401 BEN (WMc)

Petitioner,

ORDER RE: MOTION FOR LEAVE

TO FILE AMENDED PETITION 

[ECF No. 4]

v.

D.K. JOHNSON, Warden,

Respondent.

I. INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY 

On July 16, 2012, the Honorable Roger T. Benitez directed the Clerk of Court to refile a

duplicative Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in Case. No. 12cv1402 in the instant case “as an original

Motion to Amend the Petition.” [ECF No. 4 at p. 1.] Petitioner’s filing in Case. No. 12cv1402

challenged the same state court conviction as the Petition in the instant case. Id. As directed by Judge

Benitez, the Court construes the filing in Case No. 12cv1402 as a motion to amend the pending petition.

[Id. at p. 2.]

II. STANDARD

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) provides that a party may amend its complaint once “as

a matter of course” before a responsive pleading is served, or at any time within twenty days of service

if it requires no response. “Otherwise a party may amend the party’s pleading only by leave of court

or by written consent of the adverse party; and leave shall be freely given when justice so requires.” 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 (a). 

-1-

Case 3:12-cv-01401-BEN-WMC Document 5 Filed 07/26/12 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

This Court notes that on several occasions, “the Supreme Court has instructed the lower federal

courts to heed carefully the command of Rule 15(a), F[ed]. R. Civ. P., by freely granting leave to amend

when justice so requires.” DCD Programs, LTD. v. Leighton, 833 F.2d 183, 186 (9th Cir. 1995) (quoting

Gabrielson v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 785 F.2d 762, 765 (9th Cir. 1986)) (quoting Howey v. United

States, 481 F.2d 1187, 1190 (9th Cir. 1973)) (citations omitted). “Rule 15's policy of favoring

amendments to pleadings should be applied with ‘extreme liberality.’” United States v. Webb, 655 F.2d

977, 979 (9th Cir. 1981) (citing Rosenberg Brothers & Co. v. Arnold, 283 F.2d 406 (9th Cir. 1960) (per

curiam)). 

III. DISCUSSION AND ORDER THEREON

No responsive pleading has been served in the instant matter. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 (a). 

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion to amend and accepts Document No. 4 on the docket as

Plaintiff’s First Amended Petition in this action. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to identify the

filing at Document No. 4 in the Case Management / Electronic Case Filing system as the First Amended

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 26, 2012

Hon. William McCurine, Jr.

U.S. Magistrate Judge

United States District Court

-2-

Case 3:12-cv-01401-BEN-WMC Document 5 Filed 07/26/12 Page 2 of 2