As SAP correctly argues, "[a]sserting only new legal theories does not amount to diligence under Rule 16." Arellano v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., No. C 10-05663 WHA, 2012 WL 1496181, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 27, 2012); see also Hernandez v. Banner Boswell Med. Ctr., No. CV-16-04238-PHX-GMS (ESW), 2019 WL 6608778, at *3 (D. Ariz. Dec. 5, 2019) ("[D]istrict court did not abuse its discretion by holding that plaintiff's sole reason for delay in filing motion to amend after deadline set by scheduling order - that she had discovered a new legal theory through additional research - was insufficient to show good cause." (quoting Stephens v. Georgia Dept. of Transp., 134 Fed. Appx. 320, 322 (11th Cir. 2005)).