From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arellano v. Milton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 8, 2017
Case No.: 15-cv-2069-JAH-AGS (S.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2017)

Opinion

Case No.: 15-cv-2069-JAH-AGS

07-08-2017

Raul Arellano, Plaintiff, v. Milton, et al., Defendants.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO NAME DEFENDANT DOE #2
(ECF No. 38)

Pro se plaintiff Raul Arellano seeks to amend his first amended complaint to identify defendant DOE #2 as "T. Paule." (ECF No. 38.) This motion is unopposed, and the Court recommends granting it.

After amending the complaint once, a plaintiff may only obtain leave to amend again with the opposing party's written consent or leave of court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). But the court "should freely give leave [to amend] when justice so requires." Id. In making this determination, the Court must consider any reasons that weigh against further amendment, including "undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, [and] futility of amendment." Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). The most important of these so-called Foman factors is undue prejudice, which is the "touchstone of the inquiry under rule 15(a)." Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th Cir. 2003) (citations omitted).

The defense filed no opposition and thus identified no prejudice or other ills that may arise from such a limited amendment. And it appears that Arellano acted diligently to identify this defendant. After discovering the name in a medical file disclosed in another case, he promptly filed the current motion. (ECF No. 38, at 1; ECF No. 44, at 2.)

Thus, this Court recommends that Arellano's motion to change the name of defendant DOE #2 to "T. Paule" be GRANTED.

Upon being served with a copy of this report, the parties have 14 days to file any objections. Upon being served with any objections, the party receiving such objections has 14 days to file any response. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). If the District Judge grants Arellano's motion to amend, Arellano must file his second amended complaint re-naming DOE #2 as "T. Paule" within 14 days of the District Judge's order on the matter. Arellano may not otherwise amend his complaint, except as authorized by the Court. Dated: July 8, 2017

/s/_________

Hon. Andrew G. Schopler

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Arellano v. Milton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 8, 2017
Case No.: 15-cv-2069-JAH-AGS (S.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2017)
Case details for

Arellano v. Milton

Case Details

Full title:Raul Arellano, Plaintiff, v. Milton, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 8, 2017

Citations

Case No.: 15-cv-2069-JAH-AGS (S.D. Cal. Jul. 8, 2017)