Rutenburg
Rutenburg v. Twitter, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 MARIA RUTENBURG, Case No. 4:21-cv-00548-YGR
Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
v.
TWITTER, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 22 Defendant.
10 The Court previously ordered this case dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 21.) Plaintiff Maria Rutenburg subsequently filed a motion requesting leave to file a second amended complaint. (Dkt. No. 22.) Defendant Twitter Inc. opposes the motion. (Dkt. No. 23; see also Dkt. No. 24 (reply).) Having reviewed the parties’ briefing, and for the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES the motion for leave to file a second amended complaint.1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) provides that a trial court should “freely give leave when justice so requires.” A district court “may exercise its discretion to deny leave to amend due to ‘undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies…