Lopez v. Comcast Cable Communications Management LLC

Filing 29

ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers granting 26 Motion for Leave to Amend; Modifying Case Deadlines ; Plaintiff Emanuel Lopez is required to E-FILE amended document no later than 1/19/16. Comcast shall file response no later than 2/9/16.The Court VACATES the hearing set for 1/26/16. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/15/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

EMANUEL LOPEZ,

Case No. 15-cv-01220-YGR

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
AMEND; MODIFYING CASE DEADLINES

9
10

COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS
MANAGEMENT LLC,
Defendant.

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

Re: Dkt. No. 26

12

Plaintiff Emanuel Lopez brings this action against Defendant Comcast Cable

13

Communications LLC (“Comcast”). Plaintiff alleges claims for disability discrimination and

14

retaliation under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) in relation to his

15

employment with Comcast. Subsequent to the March 14, 2015 filing of the complaint herein,

16

Plaintiff was terminated by Comcast. Plaintiff now seeks to amend his complaint to add a new

17

claim for wrongful termination in violation of public policy, as well as additional factual

18

allegations to support his existing claims. Comcast argues that the Court should deny the motion

19

because Lopez has delayed unreasonably and it will be prejudiced by allowing the amendment.

20

Having carefully considered the papers submitted and the pleadings in this action, and for

21

the reasons set forth below, the Court hereby GRANTS the Motion for Leave to Amend and

22

CONTINUES the deadlines in the case as set forth herein.1

23

A party seeking to amend his complaint after the date specified in the scheduling order

24

must show good cause for the amendment under Rule 16(b), then, if “good cause” be shown, the

25

party must demonstrate that the amendment was proper under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15.

26
27
28

1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78(b) and Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), the Court
finds this motion appropriate for decision without oral argument. Accordingly, the Court
VACATES the hearing set for January 26, 2016.

Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, 975 F.2d 604, 608 (9th Cir. 1992). Rule 16(b)’s good cause

2

standard primarily considers the diligence of the party seeking the extension. Id. at 609. Federal

3

Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) provides that “[t]he court should freely give leave [to amend the

4

complaint] when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). The court considers the following

5

factors in deciding whether to grant leave to amend: (1) whether the amendment was filed with

6

undue delay; (2) whether the movant has requested the amendment in bad faith or as a dilatory

7

tactic; (3) whether movant was allowed to make previous amendments which failed to correct

8

deficiencies of the complaint; (4) whether the amendment will unduly prejudice the opposing

9

party; and (5) whether the amendment is futile. Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d

10

1048, 1052 (9th Cir. 2003); Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). These five factors are not

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

1

weighed equally and prejudice is the most important factor. Eminence Capital, LLC, 316 F.3d at

12

1052. “Absent prejudice, or a strong showing of any of the remaining Foman factors, there exists

13

a presumption under Rule 15(a) in favor of granting leave to amend.” Id. (emphasis in original).

14

The Court has considered the arguments presented by the parties and finds that leave to

15

amend should be granted. The record reveals no undue or bad faith delay in seeking to amend the

16

complaint and, to the extent the request to amend the complaint would create any prejudice under

17

the current schedule, such prejudice is completely eliminated by a brief continuance of those

18

deadlines. Therefore, the Court modifies the deadlines in this case as follows:

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

Event
Non-Expert Discovery Cutoff:
Disclosure Of Experts
(Retained/Nonretained):
Opening:
Rebuttal:
Expert Discovery Cutoff:
Dispositive Motions To Be
Heard By:
Compliance Hearing Friday
Joint Pretrial Conference
Statement:
Pretrial Conference:

27
Trial Date:
28

Current Deadline
April 1, 2016

New Deadline
June 1, 2016

June 24, 2016
July 15, 2016
August 5, 2016
June 7, 2016

August 19, 2016
September 9, 2016
September 30, 3016
August 23, 2016

August 19, 2016
August 26, 2016

October 21, 2016
October 28, 2016

September 9, 2016
at 9:00 a.m.
September 26, 2016
at 8:30 a.m.

November 9, 2016
at 2:00 p.m.
Tuesday, November 29,
2016 at 8:30 a.m.

2

1

Accordingly, the Motion for Leave to Amend is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall file his amended

2

complaint no later than January 19, 2016. Comcast shall file its response no later than February

3

9, 2016.

4

This terminates Docket No. 26.

5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7
8

Dated: January 15, 2016
______________________________________
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3