Monts #165150 v. Bowen et al

Filing 59

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION- IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Bibless 30 R&R is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the Order of this Court. Plaintiff's 22 Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint is DENIED. See document for complete details. Signed by Judge Diane J Humetewa on 8/30/19. (MSA)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Danny Lee Monts,
Plaintiff,

10
11

Shaun G Anderson, et al.,

13

ORDER

v.

12

No. CV-18-00754-PHX-DJH (CDB)

Defendants.

14
15

Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) issued by

16

United States Magistrate Judge Camille D. Bibles on April 1, 2019. (Doc. 30). The R&R

17

recommends that Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (“Motion”)

18

be denied. Judge Bibles advised the parties that they had fourteen days to file objections

19

to the R&R. Plaintiff filed his objection on April 8, 2019. (Doc. 34). Judge Bibles

20

explained the background and status of this case in the R&R and the Court need not repeat

21

that information here. Having reviewed the R&R de novo in light of the Plaintiff’s timely

22

objection thereto, the Court finds that the R&R should be accepted.

23

I.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

24

The district judge “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the

25

report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.”

26

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must

27

determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly

28

objected to.”); U.S. v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) . The Court

1

reviews for clear error the unobjected-to portions of the R&R. See Johnson v. Zema

2

Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); see also Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F. Supp.

3

2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998). The judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in

4

part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

5

§ 636(b)(1)(C); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3).

6

II.

28 U.S.C.

DISCUSSION

7

A.

8

Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a plaintiff should

9

be given leave to amend his complaint when justice so requires. See, e.g., United States v.

10

Hougham, 364 U.S. 310, 316 (1960); Howey v. United States, 481 F.2d 1187, 1190 (9th

11

Cir. 1973). Granting a plaintiff leave to amend “is subject to the qualification that the

12

amendment not cause undue prejudice to the defendant, is not sought in bad faith, and is

13

not futile.” Thornton v. McClatchy Newspapers, Inc., 261 F.3d 789, 799 (9th Cir. 2001)

14

(citation omitted). Granting or denying leave to amend is a decision committed to the

15

Court’s discretion. See Mirmehdi v. United States, 689 F.3d 975, 985 (9th Cir. 2012).

Legal Standard

Plaintiff’s Objections to Judge Bibles’ R&R

16

B.

17

At issue is Plaintiff’s request to amend his Complaint to reinstate Counts One, Two

18

against Defendant Payne, and Three through Seven. Pursuant to the Court’s original

19

Screening Order, the only remaining claim of Plaintiff’s Complaint was Count II against

20

Defendants Griffiths, Anderson, Del Castillo, and Washington for excessive use of force,

21

in their individual capacities. (Doc. 11 at 22-3). In his proposed Amended Complaint,

22

Plaintiff alleges that he corrected the deficiencies raised by this Court’s Screening Order.

23

Judge Bibles, and this Court, disagree.

24

Having considered Judge Bibles’ R&R in light of Plaintiff’s Objections (Doc. 34),

25

the Court finds that the Judge Bibles adequately addressed all of Plaintiff’s arguments and

26

correctly determined that Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint

27

(Doc. 22) should be denied.

28

Accordingly,

-2-

1

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Bibles’s R&R (Doc. 30) is ACCEPTED

2

and ADOPTED as the Order of this Court. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an

3

Amended Complaint (Doc. 22) is DENIED.

4

Dated this 30th day of August, 2019.

5
6
7
8

Honorable Diane J. Humetewa
United States District Judge

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-3-