Federal National Mortgage Association v. Canyon Willow Owners Association, et al.

Filing 34

ORDER that 30 Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint is GRANTED. FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall have seven (7) days from the date of this order to file the amended complaint. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 1/30/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7
8

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE
ASSOCIATION,

ORDER
Plaintiff(s),

9
v.

10
11

Case No. 2:16-CV-203 JCM (CWH)

CANYON WILLOW OWNERS
ASSOCIATION, et al.,

12

Defendant(s).

13
14
15
16
17

Presently before the court is plaintiff Federal National Mortgage Association’s motion for
leave to file its first amended complaint. (ECF No. 30). Plaintiff hopes “to add causes of action
for constitutional and statutory violations stemming from the HOA foreclosure sale that gave rise
to the original Complaint” in light of the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Bourne Valley Court
Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA, 832 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2016).1 (ECF No. 30).

18

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) states: “[A] party may amend its pleading only

19

with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave. The court should freely give leave

20

when justice so requires.” Moreover, “[a] district court determines the propriety of a motion to

21

amend by ascertaining the presence of any of four factors: bad faith, undue delay, prejudice to the

22

opposing party, and/or futility. Generally, this determination should be performed with all

23

inferences in favor of granting the motion.” Griggs v. Pace Am. Grp., Inc., 170 F.3d 877, 880 (9th

24
25

Cir. 1999) (citation omitted). Indeed, “where there is a lack of prejudice to the opposing party and
the amended complaint is obviously not frivolous, or made as a dilatory maneuver in bad faith, it

26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

1

The Ninth Circuit decided that case after plaintiff filed its original complaint. See Bourne
Valley Court Trust, 832 F.3d at 1154; see also (ECF No. 1).

1

is an abuse of discretion to deny [a motion to amend.]” Howey v. United States, 481 F.2d 1187,

2

1190–91 (9th Cir. 1973).

3

Upon review of the instant motion and the corresponding proposed amended complaint,

4

this motion will be granted. (ECF Nos. 30, 30-1). Because plaintiff asserts these new allegations

5
6
7

in light of a recently published, highly relevant decision by the Ninth Circuit, this court finds that
there is neither bad faith nor undue delay for the complaint’s amendment. See Griggs, 170 F.3d
at 880. Moreover, the new claims in the amended complaint arise from essentially the same set of
facts as those of the original complaint—thereby producing minimal prejudice to the defendant—

8

and the amendment does not appear to be futile.

9

Microsystems, Inc., 368 F.3d 1053, 1061 (9th Cir. 2004); Griggs, 170 F.3d at 880.

See Thinket Ink Info. Res., Inc. v. Sun

10

Accordingly,

11

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff’s motion for

12
13
14
15
16

leave to file an amended complaint (ECF No. 30) be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall have seven (7) days from the date of this
order to file the amended complaint.
DATED January 30, 2017.
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-