Dabney et al v. City of Hayward et al

Filing 66

ORDER Signed by Magistrate Judge Bernard Zimmerman denying re 56 Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint. (bzsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/28/2011)

Dabney et al v. City of Hayward et al

Doc. 66

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiffs have moved for leave to file their third amended complaint (Docket No. 56) so that they could add the true names of defendant's Officers who were originally named as Doe defendants. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs' v. CITY OF HAYWARD, et al., Defendant(s). ROBERT DABNEY, et al., Plaintiff(s), ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

No.

C09-4116 BZ

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT

motion is DENIED because they have not made the necessary showing under FRCP 16(b)(4) that there is "good cause" to modify the pretrial scheduling order and permit such an amendment. Plaintiffs have not offered any reasonable

explanation as to why they waited until the eve of trial to seek leave. The Court's pretrial order clearly states that

the City of Hayward is the only defendant and that all unsecured Doe defendants are stricken. 1
Dockets.Justia.com

See Docket No. 51.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

The Court finds no need for argument on this issue and the hearing set for April 6, 2011 is VACATED. Dated: March 28, 2011 Bernard Zimmerman United States Magistrate Judge
G:\BZALL\-BZCASES\DABNEY V. CITY OF HAYWARD\ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO FILE COMPLAINT.wpd

2