Grogan v. Archwell Holdings LLC, et al

Filing 15

Order Accepting Amended Complaint and Clarifying Service Obligations re (ECF No. #12 ) filed by Brian Anthony Grogan. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 10/25/2024.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (mef).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BRIAN A. GROGAN,

Case No.: 24-CV-1618 JLS (DEB)
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.

14

BIRD ROCK HOME MORTGAGE,
LLC, et al.,

15

ORDER ACCEPTING AMENDED
COMPLAINT AND CLARIFYING
SERVICE OBLIGATIONS
(ECF No. 12)

Defendants.

16
17

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Brian A. Grogan’s Second Amended

18

Complaint (“SAC,” ECF No. 12). Plaintiff originally brought this action on September 10,

19

2024, against over a dozen defendants. See ECF No. 1. One week later, Plaintiff amended

20

his Complaint, adding three additional defendants. See ECF No. 4. Recognizing a

21

potential lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the diversity jurisdiction provision of 28

22

U.S.C. § 1332, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause, ordering Plaintiff “to show cause

23

as to why diversity jurisdiction exists over this matter.” ECF No. 9 (“Order”) at 2. In

24

response, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal in which he voluntarily dismissed

25

without prejudice nine of the defendants.

26

contemporaneously amended his Complaint for a second time to reflect the voluntary

27

dismissal, and he also added new claims for violations of federal and state credit reporting

28

laws. See id.

See ECF No. 11 at 3.

Plaintiff

1
24-CV-1618 JLS (DEB)

1

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, “[a] party may amend its pleading once

2

as a matter of course within . . . 21 days after serving it.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). After

3

amending once as of right, however, “a party may amend its pleading only with the

4

opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Plaintiff

5

exhausted his one amendment as of right when he properly amended his original Complaint

6

the first time on September 17, 2024, which was less than twenty-one days after serving it.

7

See ECF No. 4. However, Plaintiff did not seek nor obtain the Court’s leave to amend his

8

Complaint for the second time on October 8, 2024. See Docket. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s

9

Second Amended Complaint was improperly filed in violation of Federal Rule of Civil

10

Procedure 15(a)(2).

11

Despite Plaintiff’s error, the Court accepts Plaintiff’s pleading as the filing was

12

apparently in response to the Court’s Order and there does not appear to be prejudice to

13

any of the Defendants as no Defendant has yet been served or appeared in the matter.

14

However, Plaintiff is advised to abide by the amendment obligations prescribed by Federal

15

Rule of Civil Procedure 15 in the future, as the Court may not be so generous the next time

16

around. Plaintiff is further advised to consult Southern District of California Civil Local

17

Rule 15.1 for other obligations as they relate to amended pleadings.

18

Having accepted Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint, the Court’s jurisdictional

19

concerns have ostensibly been cured with Plaintiff’s addition of a federal cause of action

20

for the alleged violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. SAC ¶ 4. With that new cause

21

of action, the face of Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint appears to satisfy the

22

requirements of federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. See Grable & Sons

23

Metal Prods., Inc. v. Darue Eng’g & Mfg., 545 U.S. 308, 312 (2005) (“[Section 1331] is

24

invoked by and large by plaintiffs pleading a cause of action created by federal law . . . .”).

25

The Court is thus satisfied, at least for now, that jurisdiction is proper in federal court.

26

Accordingly, the Court accepts Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint (ECF

27

No. 12), and Plaintiff is now directed to comply with the service requirements of Federal

28

Rule of Civil Procedure 4. Plaintiff SHALL serve all Defendants within ninety (90) days
2
24-CV-1618 JLS (DEB)

1

of the filing date of the original Complaint, or alternatively, if a defendant was added by

2

later amendment, within ninety (90) days from the date of the amendment. See McGuckin

3

v. United States, 918 F.2d 811, 813 (9th Cir. 1990).

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 25, 2024

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
24-CV-1618 JLS (DEB)