Donovin Last v. M-I, L.L.C.

Filing 21

ORDER GRANTING #12 Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Answer, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 06/02/2021. (Maldonado, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

DONOVIN LAST, an individual, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16
17

v.

No. 1:20-cv-01205-DAD-JLT

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
FILE A FIRST AMENDED ANSWER

M-I, L.L.C.,
(Doc. No. 12)
Defendant.
This matter is before the court on the unopposed motion for leave to file a first amended

18

answer filed by defendant M-I, L.L.C. on February 26, 2021. (Doc. No. 12.) In particular,

19

defendant seeks to file a first amended answer to add a single affirmative defense. (Id.; see also

20

Doc. No. 12-1 (proposed amended answer)). On April 2, 2021, plaintiff filed a statement of non-

21

opposition to defendant’s pending motion. (Doc. No. 14.) Pursuant to General Order No. 617

22

addressing the public health emergency posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, defendant’s motion

23

was taken under submission on the papers. (Doc. No. 13.)

24

“A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within: (A) 21 days after

25

serving it or (B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after

26

service if a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f),

27

whichever is earlier.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Otherwise, a party must seek leave of court to

28

amend a pleading or receive the opposing party’s written consent. Id.
1

1

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that leave to amend pleadings “shall be

2

freely given when justice so requires.” Id. Nevertheless, leave to amend need not be granted

3

when the amendment: (1) prejudices the opposing party; (2) is sought in bad faith; (3) produces

4

an undue delay in litigation; or (4) is futile. See AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Dialysist W. Inc.,

5

465 F.3d 946, 951 (9th Cir. 2006) (citing Bowles v. Reade, 198 F.3d 752, 757 (9th Cir. 1999)).

6

“Prejudice to the opposing party is the most important factor.” Jackson v. Bank of Haw., 902

7

F.3d 1385, 1397 (9th Cir. 1990) (citing Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research Inc., 401 U.S.

8

321, 330–31 (1971)). “The party opposing leave to amend bears the burden of showing

9

prejudice.” Serpa v. SBC Telecomms., 318 F. Supp. 2d 865, 870 (N.D. Cal. 2004) (citing DCD

10

Programs, Ltd. v. Leighton, 833 F.2d 183, 187 (9th Cir. 1987)).

11

Here, by filing a statement of non-opposition to defendant’s motion for leave to file a first

12

amended answer, plaintiff has effectively provided defendant with his written consent. (Doc. No.

13

14.) In addition, by not opposing defendant’s motion, plaintiff essentially concedes that he is not

14

prejudiced by the court granting defendant leave to amend its answer.

15

Accordingly:

16

1. Defendant’s unopposed motion for leave to file a first amended answer (Doc. No. 12)

17
18

is granted; and
2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to file the proposed first amended answer

19
20
21

(Doc. No. 12-1) on the docket captioned as the first amended answer.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 2, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2