Amy

Amy v. Curtis

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 6, 20203:19-cv-02184California216 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

AMY, et al., Case No. 19-cv-02184-PJH Plaintiffs,

v. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS'

MOTION TO FILE A FIRST AMENDED

RANDALL STEVEN CURTIS, COMPLAINT AND VACATING

HEARING

Defendant. Re: Dkt. No. 77

13 Before the court is plaintiffs’ motion to file a first amended complaint. Dkt. 77. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 requires that a plaintiff obtain either consent of the defendant or leave of court to amend its complaint once the defendant has answered, but “leave shall be freely given when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Leave to amend is granted with “extreme liberality.” Chodos v. W. Publ’g Co., 292 F.3d 992, 1003 (9th Cir. 2002). Plaintiffs have filed their motion well within the timeframe established by the court’s Case Management and Pretrial Order. Dkt. 74. The court finds that defendant would not be unduly prejudiced by an amended complaint and defendant’s futility argument is misplaced. …

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.