Ramos

Ramos v. Landschoot

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 26, 20242:24-cv-01562California467 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 OSCAR RAMOS, No. 2:24-cv-01562-CKD Plaintiff, v. ORDER JUDY LANSCHOOT, ET AL., Defendants. 16 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to amend his first amended complaint. (ECF No. 9.) Defendants have not yet appeared in this matter. Based on the absence of opposition, the matter is deemed submitted on the record without the need for oral argument pursuant to Local Rule 230(g). Pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may amend a pleading once as a matter of course before a responsive pleading is served. Otherwise, a party may amend only by leave of the court or by written consent of the adverse party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). “Rule 15(a) is very liberal and leave to amend shall be given freely when justice so requires.” AmerisourceBergen Corp. v. Dialysist West, Inc., 465 F.3d 946, 951 (9th Cir. 2006) (citation and quotation omitted). The district court may deny a motion to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.