Gonzalez v. Veterans Administration et al

Filing 42

ORDER denying without prejudice to renewal 39 Motion to Compel signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 9/15/17. (Kaminski, H)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DANIEL E. GONZALEZ, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:15-cv-1997 MCE DB PS Plaintiff, v. ORDER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 19 Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was, therefore, referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On September 5, 2017, plaintiff filed a motion seeking “a declaratory judicial 20 determination of his rights to proceed with amending his claims and to conduct discovery . . . .” 21 (ECF No. 39 at 4.) With respect to amending a complaint, pursuant to Rule 15, a plaintiff may 22 amend his complaint once as a matter of course within twenty-one days after serving it or twenty- 23 one days after service of a responsive pleading or motion pursuant to Rule 12(b). See Fed. R. 24 Civ. P. 15. In all other cases, a plaintiff may amend his complaint with defendant’s written 25 consent or the court’s leave. Id. 26 “Rule 15(a) is very liberal and leave to amend shall be freely given when justice so 27 requires.” AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Dialysist West, Inc., 465 F.3d 946, 951 (9th Cir. 2006) 28 (quotation omitted); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) (“The court should freely give leave when 1 1 justice so requires.”). However, courts “need not grant leave to amend where the amendment: (1) 2 prejudices the opposing party; (2) is sought in bad faith; (3) produces an undue delay in the 3 litigation; or (4) is futile.” Id. The “court’s discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly 4 broad where the court has already given the plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint.” 5 Fidelity Financial Corp. v. Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, 792 F.2d 1432, 1438 (9th 6 Cir. 1986). 7 Here, plaintiff is proceeding on an amended complaint and must obtain defendant’s 8 consent or leave of court to file a second amended complaint. A motion for leave to amend 9 would need to comply with Local Rule 230 and should be noticed on the undersigned’s law and 10 11 motion calendar. With respect to conducting discovery, on June 28, 2017, the undersigned issued a Status 12 (Pretrial Scheduling) Order. (ECF No. 37.) Pursuant to that order, the parties’ discovery shall be 13 completed by March 2, 2018. (Id. at 2.) Should a discovery dispute arise that the parties cannot 14 resolve, plaintiff should consult Local Rule 251 concerning discovery disputes. Plaintiff is 15 advised that the undersigned strictly enforces meet and confer requirements. 16 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s September 5, 2017 motion (ECF 17 No. 39) is denied without prejudice to renewal. 18 Dated: September 15, 2017 19 20 21 22 23 DLB:6 DB/orders/orders.pro se/gonzalez1997.mtc.ord 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?