Estate of Jonathan Madrigal v. County of El Dorado

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ESTATE OF JONATHAN MADRIGAL, No. 2:23-cv-02673-MCE-AC et al., 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER v. 14 COUNTY OF EL DORADO, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ unopposed Motion to Amend the 18 Complaint (ECF No. 20) to substitute named parties for the Doe Defendants and to add 19 factual allegations pertinent to, among other things, the actions taken by those newly 20 named parties. Already pending is a Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10) filed by a subset of 21 Defendants. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs’ Motion is GRANTED, and the 22 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as moot.1 23 Generally, a motion to amend is subject to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a),2 24 which provides that “[t]he court should freely give leave [to amend] when justice so

26 1 Because oral argument would not have been of material assistance, the Court ordered this matter submitted on the briefs. E.D. Local Rule 230(g).

2 All further references to “Rule” or “Rules” are to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.…