Thomas v. The Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. et al

Filing 71

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/4/15 GRANTING 68 Motion to Amend the Complaint. Responsive pleading due by 6/18/15. (Manzer, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

VELDEMETRIC R. THOMAS,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:13-cv-02250-TLN-AC

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

HOME DEPOT, U.S.A., INC.,
Defendant.

16
17
18
19

This matter is before the undersigned pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(21). Presently before
the court is plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend her fourth amended complaint. ECF No. 68.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) instructs district courts that “leave [to amend] shall

20

be freely given when justice so requires.” “In the absence of any apparent or declared reason—

21

such as undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to

22

cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by

23

virtue of allowance of the amendment, futility of amendment, etc.—the leave sought should, as

24

the rules require, be freely given.” Schultz v. Wal–Mart Stores, Inc., 68 Fed. Appx. 130, 132 (9th

25

Cir. 2003) (quoting Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962) (internal quotation marks

26

omitted)). “The strong policy permitting amendment is to be applied with ‘extreme liberality.’”

27

Id. (quoting Eminence Capital, L.L.C. v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir. 2003)).

28
1

1

In light of the strong presumption in favor of leave to amend, the court will grant

2

plaintiff’s motion. However, plaintiff is warned that the court will not be inclined to grant future

3

motions seeking leave to amend. Plaintiff has twice previously been granted leave to amend her

4

complaint, ECF Nos. 46, 62, and has attempted to amend her complaint on five other occasions,

5

ECF Nos. 39, 53, 54, 59, 66. Plaintiff can only seek to amend her complaint so many times

6

before the prejudice to defendant outweighs the presumption in favor of granting leave to amend.

7

Defendant must be allowed to file a responsive pleading or motion, and it cannot do so if plaintiff

8

is ceaselessly amending her complaint.

9

Accordingly, THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS that plaintiff’s motion for leave to

10

amend, ECF No. 68, is GRANTED. Defendant must file a responsive pleading or motion by June

11

18, 2015.

12

DATED: June 4, 2015

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2