Economus v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Filing 44

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 35 Motion for Leave to File Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint. Amended Pleadings due by 11/2/2018. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/26/2018)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

ANTHONY ECONOMUS,
Plaintiff,

8
v.

9
10

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO, et al.,

11

Case No. 18-cv-01071-HSG
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT
Re: Dkt. No. 35

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Defendants.
12
13

On March 15, 2018, Plaintiff Anthony Economus filed a motion for leave to file a Second

14

Amended Complaint, in which Plaintiff includes a negligence cause of action. Dkt. No. 35. The

15

motion is unopposed by Defendants. Dkt. No. 41. The motion is now pending before the Court.1
Under Federal Rule of Procedure 15(a)(2), “leave to amend shall be freely granted ‘when

16
17

justice so requires.’” Townsend v. Univ. of Alaska, 543 F.3d 478, 485 (9th Cir. 2008) (quoting

18

Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2)). “This policy is to be applied with extreme liberality.” Eminence

19

Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir. 2003) (internal quotation marks

20

omitted). The five factors relevant to determining proper amendment are (1) bad faith, (2) undue

21

delay, (3) prejudice to the opposing party, (4) futility of amendment, and (5) previous

22

amendments. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962); see also Wash. State Republican Party

23

v. Wash. State Grange, 676 F.3d 784, 797 (9th Cir. 2012) (same factors). The Court weighs

24

prejudice to the opposing party most heavily. Eminence Capital, 316 F.3d at 1052 (9th Cir. 2003).

25
26

“Absent prejudice, or a strong showing of any of the remaining Foman factors, there exists a
presumption under Rule 15(a) in favor of granting leave to amend.” Id. (emphasis in original). As

27
28

1

The Court finds this matter appropriate for disposition without oral argument and the matter is
deemed submitted. See Civil L.R. 7-1(b).

1

the motion is unopposed, the presumption in favor of granting leave to amend applies. The Court

2

thus GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion. The second amended complaint must be filed by November 2,

3

2018.

4
5
6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 10/26/2018
______________________________________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge

8
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
2