Satz
Satz v. Corrections Corporations of America, Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
*66 MEMORANDUM **
Federal prisoner Michael Satz appeals pro se the district court’s partial summary-judgment for defendants, and the district court’s denial of Satz’s untimely jury demand, motions for leave to amend, and request for a separate hearing on damages and costs in Satz’s Bivens action against a private prison company and its employees. The district court awarded Satz $600.00 following a bench trial on the only claim to survive summary judgment. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm in part, reverse in part and remand.
We review a district court’s denial of a motion to amend for an abuse of discretion. Orsay v. United States Dept. of Justice, 289 F.3d 1125 , 1128 (9th Cir.2002). The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Satz’s first motion to amend for failure to attach a proposed amended complaint as required by local rule, see Waters v. Weyerhaeuser Mortgage Co., 582 F.2d 503, 507 (9th Cir.1978), and by rejecting subsequent amended complaints due to their inordinate length and failure to allege a cause of action against new defendants, see McHenry v. Renne, 84 F.3d 1172, 1177 (9th Cir.1996).