Opinion ID: 172793
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Denial of Leave to Amend Motion

Text: In his § 2255 proceeding, Pinson sought leave of the district court to amend his petition to expand the basis for claims already raised by alleging additional facts and supporting exhibits which support the defendant's claims. (R., vol. 1 at 45.) The district court denied this motion, due to the scope of Pinson's appeal waiver and lack of merit in his ineffective assistance of counsel claims. We review the district court's decision to deny Pinson leave to amend his petition for abuse of discretion. Stafford v. Saffle, 34 F.3d 1557, 1560 (10th Cir. 1994). Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), a district court may deny leave to amend pleadings due to, among other reasons, futility of the amendment. Stafford, 34 F.3d at 1560 (quoting Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182, 83 S.Ct. 227, 9 L.Ed.2d 222 (1962)). Here, because Pinson's proposed amendment would only have added further factual support for claims that the district court had already found legally flawed, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion in denying Pinson leave to amend.