Taylor v. 144th Fighter Wing, et .al.

Filing 64

ORDER RE: MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 1/2/14. As the court made clear in its Order granting summary judgment, plaintiff is free to bring any other claim that the court has not disposed of in its summary judgment Order in a separate action. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to amend be, and the same hereby is, DENIED. (Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
----oo0oo----

11
12

GARY TAYLOR,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16
17

NO. CIV. 2:12-2466 WBS DAD
ORDER RE: MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

v.
DEFENSE FINANCE & ACCOUNTING
SERVICE; UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA; DAVID S. BALDWIN;
HARRY M. WYATT III; MARK
GROVES; TERESA MCKAY; DOES
ONE through TEN,

18

Defendants.

19
20
----oo0oo----

21

In a separate Order, this court granted summary

22
23

judgment on each of plaintiff’s four remaining claims in this

24

action.

25

an amended complaint.

26

summary judgment Order resolved every claim at issue in this

27

case, it would be inappropriate to permit amendment at this

28

juncture.

(Docket No. 62.)

Plaintiff now moves for leave to file

(Docket No. 49.)

Because the court’s

See, e.g., Nguyen v. United States, 792 F.2d 1500,
1

1

1503 (9th Cir. 1986) (“A court will ordinarily be reluctant to

2

allow leave to amend to a party against whom summary judgment has

3

been entered.” (citing C. Wright, A. Miller, & M. Kane, Federal

4

Practice & Procedure § 2712 (2d ed. 1983)); Schlacter-Jones v.

5

Gen. Tel. of Cal., 936 F.2d 435, 443 (9th Cir. 1991), abrogated

6

on other grounds by Cramer v. Consol. Freightways, Inc., 255 F.3d

7

683 (9th Cir. 2001) (“A motion for leave to amend is not a

8

vehicle to circumvent summary judgment.”).

9

As the court made clear in its Order granting summary

10

judgment, plaintiff is free to bring any other claim that the

11

court has not disposed of in its summary judgment Order in a

12

separate action.

13

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for

14

leave to amend be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.

15

Dated:

January 2, 2014

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2