Franklin v. Bisantz et al
Filing
16
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 12/26/2017 GRANTING 12 Motion to Amend the Complaint. Plaintiff is granted 28 days from the date of this order to file an amended complaint; DENYING without prejudice to renewal 4 and 6 Motions to Dismiss and VACATING the 12/29/2017 hearing of those motions. (York, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MIKE FRANKLIN,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:17-cv-2138 KJM DB PS
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
VICKI ASHWORTH, 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).
Plaintiff commenced this action on October 16, 2017, by filing a complaint and paying the
20
required filing fee. (ECF No. 1.) Noticed for hearing before the undersigned on December 29,
21
2017, are defendants’ motions to dismiss. (ECF Nos. 4 & 6.) However, on December 15, 2017,
22
plaintiff filed a motion requesting leave to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 12.) Defendants
23
oppose plaintiff’s request. (ECF Nos. 13 & 15.)
24
“Rule 15(a) is very liberal and leave to amend shall be freely given when justice so
25
requires.” AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Dialysist West, Inc., 465 F.3d 946, 951 (9th Cir. 2006)
26
(quotation omitted); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) (“The court should freely give leave when
27
justice so requires.”). However, courts “need not grant leave to amend where the amendment: (1)
28
prejudices the opposing party; (2) is sought in bad faith; (3) produces an undue delay in the
1
1
litigation; or (4) is futile.” Id. The “court’s discretion to deny leave to amend is particularly
2
broad where the court has already given the plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint.”
3
Fidelity Financial Corp. v. Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, 792 F.2d 1432, 1438 (9th
4
Cir. 1986).
5
Here, the undersigned cannot yet say that granting plaintiff further leave to amend will
6
prejudice the opposing party; is sought in bad faith; will produce an undue delay in the litigation;
7
or is futile. Therefore, and in light of plaintiff’s pro se status, the undersigned will grant
8
plaintiff’s request for leave to file an amended complaint.
Plaintiff is cautioned, however, that if plaintiff elects to file an amended complaint “the
9
10
tenet that a court must accept as true all of the allegations contained in a complaint is inapplicable
11
to legal conclusions. Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere
12
conclusory statements, do not suffice.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). “While
13
legal conclusions can provide the complaint’s framework, they must be supported by factual
14
allegations.” Id. at 679. Those facts must be sufficient to push the claims “across the line from
15
conceivable to plausible[.]” Id. at 680 (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544,
16
570 (2007)).
17
Plaintiff is also reminded that the court cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make an
18
amended complaint complete. Local Rule 220 requires that any amended complaint be complete
19
in itself without reference to prior pleadings. The amended complaint will supersede the original
20
complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Thus, in an amended complaint,
21
just as if it were the initial complaint filed in the case, each defendant must be listed in the caption
22
and identified in the body of the complaint, and each claim and the involvement of each
23
defendant must be sufficiently alleged. Any amended complaint which plaintiff may elect to file
24
must also include concise but complete factual allegations describing the conduct and events
25
which underlie plaintiff’s claims.
26
////
27
////
28
////
2
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1. Plaintiff’s December 15, 2017 motion for leave to amend (ECF No. 12) is granted;
3
2. Plaintiff is granted twenty-eight days from the date of this order to file an amended
4
complaint. The amended complaint must bear the case number assigned to this action and must
5
be titled “Amended Complaint”;
6
7
8
9
10
3. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to comply with this order in a timely manner may
result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed; and
4. Defendants’ motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 4 & 6) are denied without prejudice to
renewal and the December 29, 2017 hearing of those motions is vacated.
Dated: December 26, 2017
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
DLB:6
DB/orders/orders.pro se/franklin2138.lta.grt.ord
25
26
27
28
3
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?