Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-07505/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-07505-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gerardo Hernandez
Plaintiff
Jefferson Gas & Shop
Defendant
Thomas I. Saberi
Defendant
Thomas Issa Saberi
Defendant
Saberi Oil, Inc.
Defendant

Document Text:

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERARDO HERNANDEZ,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SABERI OIL, INC., dba JEFFERSON GAS &

SHOP, and THOMAS I. SABERI aka

THOMAS ISSA SABERI,

Defendants. /

No. C 18-07505 WHA

ORDER RE MOTION FOR

LEAVE TO FILE FIRST

AMENDED COMPLAINT AND

VACATING HEARING

In this ADA action, plaintiff seeks leave to file a first amended complaint. Defendants

oppose. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED.

Plaintiff Gerardo Hernandez initiated this action in December 2018 against defendants

Saberi Oil and Thomas Saberi. Plaintiff has alleged among other claims violations of Title III of

the ADA by Jefferson Gas & Shop in Redwood City which is owned, operated, and/or leased by

defendants. In March 2019, the parties conducted a joint site inspection of the gas station

pursuant to General Order 56. Plaintiff filed the instant motion on July 19. This order follows

full briefing. Pursuant to our local civil rule 7-1(b), this order finds plaintiff’s motion suitable

for submission without oral argument and hereby VACATES the September 12 hearing. 

Plaintiff seeks leave to file a first amended complaint adding allegations regarding access

barriers identified at the joint site inspection. FRCP 15(a)(2) permits a party to amend its

pleading with the court’s leave, stating that “[t]he court should freely give leave when justice so

requires.” In the FRCP 15 context, our court of appeals has instructed that “[f]ive factors are

Case 3:18-cv-07505-WHA Document 30 Filed 08/16/19 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

frequently used to assess the propriety of a motion for leave to amend: (1) bad faith, (2) undue

delay, (3) prejudice to the opposing party, (4) futility of amendment[,] and (5) whether plaintiff

has previously amended his complaint.” Allen v. City of Beverly Hills, 911 F.2d 367, 373 (9th

Cir. 1990). These factors weigh in favor of granting leave.

First, defendants argue granting leave would be futile because plaintiff does not have

standing to add the new barriers alleged in his proposed first amended complaint. This motion

seeks only to add barriers at the same gas station already the subject of the lawsuit. It does not

seek to add additional parking lots or businesses. These additional barriers came to light during

the site inspection under General Order 56. Contrary to defendants’ arguments, plaintiff does

have standing to add these barriers at the gas station because plaintiff testified he had visited the

same gas station many times. He was also able to see the doorway to the restroom and that it

was inaccessible. But even if plaintiff had not seen the doorway to the restroom, he would have

standing because of the frequency in which he had visited the gas station, and in due course can

be expected to need to use the restroom. This is not a case, at least according to plaintiff’s

deposition testimony, where the ADA plaintiff merely drives by a previously unknown store and

adds it to the list of ADA target defendants. 

Second, defendants argue that they will be prejudiced if leave to amend is granted by

merely contending further discovery would be required and plaintiff’s deposition has already

been taken. Accordingly, plaintiff may be deposed for three more hours. For the reasons stated

above, plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the complaint is GRANTED. The hearing scheduled

for September 12 is VACATED. Plaintiff shall file the first amended complaint attached to her

motion as a separate docket entry by AUGUST 23 AT NOON.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 16, 2019. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:18-cv-07505-WHA Document 30 Filed 08/16/19 Page 2 of 2