King v. Villegas et al

Filing 91

ORDER Re: Lodged Amended Complaint; Plaintiff to File a Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint, signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 11/20/2019. THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE. (Orozco, A)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 JERRY LEE KING, 10 11 12 13 Plaintiff, Case No. 1:17-cv-00676-AWI-EPG (PC) ORDER RE: LODGED AMENDED COMPLAINT v. (ECF NO. 90) R. VILLEGAS and P. CRUZ, Defendants. THIRTY-DAY DEADLINE 14 15 16 17 Jerry King (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On November 18, 2019, Plaintiff lodged a proposed amended complaint. (ECF No. 90). 18 However, Plaintiff did not file a motion for leave to amend along with the complaint. Plaintiff 19 previously filed a motion for leave to amend, but the prior motion does not address all of the 20 claims Plaintiff is attempting to add, and has already been denied (ECF No. 89). 21 22 23 Accordingly, the Court will give Plaintiff thirty days from the date of service of this order to file a motion for leave to amend. The Court provides the following legal standards. Courts “should freely give leave [to 24 amend] when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). “[T]his policy is to be applied with 25 extreme liberality.” Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. Rose, 893 F.2d 1074, 1079 (9th Cir. 26 1990). See also Waldrip v. Hall, 548 F.3d 729, 732 (9th Cir. 2008). “However, liberality in 27 granting leave to amend is subject to several limitations. Those limitations include undue 28 prejudice to the opposing party, bad faith by the movant, futility, and undue delay.” Cafasso, 1 1 U.S. ex rel. v. Gen. Dynamics C4 Sys., Inc., 637 F.3d 1047, 1058 (9th Cir. 2011) (internal 2 quotation marks and citations omitted). See also Waldrip, 548 F.3d at 732. “[T]he 3 consideration of prejudice to the opposing party [] carries the greatest weight.” Eminence 4 Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th Cir. 2003). 5 Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff has thirty days from the date of 6 service of this order to file a motion for leave to amend. If Plaintiff files a motion for leave to 7 amend, Defendants’ response is due within twenty-one days of the date of the order lifting the 8 stay. 9 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: November 20, 2019 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?