Ninteman v. The Dutra Group

Filing 14

ORDER Granting 13 Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint. The Clerk of Court is instructed to file Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 13-1) as a separate docket entry. Signed by Judge Michael M. Anello on 10/16/2018. (rmc)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ROBERT NINTEMAN,

Case No.: 18cv1222-MMA (AGS)
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.

14

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE
TO FILE FIRST AMENDED
COMPLAINT
[Doc. No. 13]

THE DUTRA GROUP,

15

Defendant.

16
17

On June 11, 2018, Plaintiff Robert Ninteman (“Plaintiff”) commenced the instant

18

action against Defendant The Dutra Group (“Defendant”) alleging claims for negligence

19

under the Jones Act, and maintenance, cure and unearned wages under general maritime

20

law. Doc. No. 1 (“Compl.”). On September 13, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting

21

leave to file a First Amended Complaint. Doc. No. 13-2 (“Mtn.”). To date, Defendant

22

has not filed an opposition to Plaintiff’s motion. See Docket. The Court, in its discretion,

23

decides the matter on the papers submitted and without oral argument pursuant to Civil

24

Local Rule 7.1.d.1. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s

25

unopposed motion for leave to file a First Amended Complaint.

26
27
28

LEGAL STANDARD
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 governs amendment of pleadings. It states that
if a responsive pleading has already been filed, the party seeking amendment “may
1
18cv1222-MMA (AGS)

1

amend the party’s pleading only by leave of court or by written consent of the adverse

2

party; and leave shall be freely given when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a).

3

This rule reflects an underlying policy that disputes should be determined on their merits,

4

and not on the technicalities of pleading rules. See Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 181-

5

82 (1962). Accordingly, the Court must be generous in granting leave to amend. See

6

Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. Rose, 893 F.2d 1074, 1079 (9th Cir. 1990) (noting

7

leave to amend should be granted with “extreme liberality”); Ascon Props., Inc. v. Mobil

8

Oil Co., 866 F.2d 1149, 1160 (9th Cir. 1989).

9

However, courts may deny leave to amend for several reasons, including the

10

presence of bad faith on the part of the plaintiff, undue delay, prejudice to the defendant,

11

futility of amendment, and whether the plaintiff has previously filed an amended

12

complaint. See Ascon Props., 866 F.2d at 1160; McGlinchy v. Shell Chem. Co., 845 F.2d

13

802, 809 (9th Cir. 1988). The test of futility “is identical to the one used when

14

considering the sufficiency of a pleading challenged under Rule 12(b)(6).” Miller v.

15

Rykoff-Sexton, Inc., 845 F.2d 209, 214 (9th Cir. 1988).
DISCUSSION

16
17

Plaintiff seeks to amend his Complaint by adding “a cause of action for

18

unseaworthiness due to the lack of fall protection on the vessels to which he was

19

assigned.” Mtn. at 2. Plaintiff requests the Court grant him leave to amend because there

20

is no undue delay or prejudice to Defendant. Id. at 8. Here, the Court finds that

21

Plaintiff’s proposed amendment is not futile, and there is no evidence that the proposed

22

amendment will prejudice Defendant. Additionally, Plaintiff filed his motion by the

23

deadline set forth in the Court’s scheduling order (see Doc. No. 12), and it does not

24

appear that Plaintiff delayed in filing the instant motion. Further, Plaintiff has not

25

previously amended his Complaint. Therefore, upon thorough review of the relevant

26

documents, and after examining the relevant factors, the Court finds that permitting

27

Plaintiff leave to amend his Complaint to add a cause of action for unseaworthiness is

28

appropriate.
2
18cv1222-MMA (AGS)

CONCLUSION

1
2

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for leave to file a

3

First Amended Complaint. The Clerk of Court is instructed to file Plaintiff’s First

4

Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 13-1) as a separate docket entry.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 16, 2018

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
18cv1222-MMA (AGS)