Harvey et al v. Centene Corporation et al

Filing 39

ORDER GRANTING ECF No. #37 PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT; striking ECF No. #16 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; striking ECF No. #17 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; striking ECF No. #18 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. Signed by Judge Salvador Mendoza, Jr. (TR, Case Administrator)

Download PDF
1 FILED IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 3 4 5 CYNTHIA HARVEY and STEVEN A. MILMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 6 Plaintiff, 7 v. Jul 17, 2018 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK No. 2:18-CV-00012-SMJ ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT 8 9 10 11 CENTENE CORPORATION, COORDINATED CARE CORPORATION, and SUPERIOR HEALTHPLAN, INC., Defendants. 12 Before the Court, without oral argument, is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to 13 Amend Class Action Complaint, ECF No. 37. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 14 15(a)(2) provides that a party seeking to amend a pleading on a date more than 21 15 days after the initial pleading was filed may do so “only with the opposing party’s 16 written consent or the court’s leave.” The rule instructs that “[t]he court should 17 freely give leave when justice so requires.” Id. “The more common reasons for 18 denying leave to amend are that the amendment will result in undue prejudice to the 19 other party, is unduly delayed, is not offered in good faith, or that the party has had 20 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - 1 1 sufficient opportunity to state a claim and has failed.” Komie v. Buehler Corp., 449 2 F.2d 644, 647-48 (9th Cir. 1971) (internal quotation marks omitted). 3 The Court finds that good cause exists to grant Plaintiffs’ motion. Because 4 this matter is still in its early stages, the proposed amendments, though substantial, 5 will not prejudice Defendants. Plaintiffs did not unduly delay their motion because 6 the discovery and dispositive motion deadlines are not currently scheduled. 7 Moreover, it does not appear that Plaintiffs’ motion is motivated by bad faith. 8 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 9 Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Amend Class Action Complaint, ECF 10 No. 37, is GRANTED. Plaintiffs shall file an amended complaint 11 consistent with ECF No. 38 no later than July 24, 2018. 12 1. In light of the changed pleadings, Defendants’ pending motions to 13 dismiss, ECF Nos. 16, 17, and 18, and all dates and deadlines 14 associated with those motions, are STRICKEN. Defendants may file 15 dispositive motions any time before the dispositive motion deadline. 16 17 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. The Clerk’s Office is directed to enter this Order and provide copies to all counsel. DATED this 17th day of July 2018. 19 20 SALVADOR MENDOZA, JR. United States District Judge ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?