Opinion
Civil Action No. 07-cv-00703-PAB-KMT.
August 18, 2008
ORDER
This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's "Motion Requesting to Amend Complaint" (Doc. No. 136, filed July 31, 2009). It appears Plaintiff wants to amend his complaint by adding an additional party.
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that a party may amend a pleading by leave of court, and that leave shall be given freely when justice so requires. Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). Although the federal rules permit and require liberal construction and amendment of pleadings, the rules do not grant the parties unlimited rights of amendment. A motion to amend may be denied on the grounds of 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, or futility of amendment. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962).
When seeking leave of the court to amend a complaint, the motion to amend must detail the proposed amendments and the reasons why such amendments are necessary. In addition, the plaintiff must attach the proposed amended complaint to the motion. The proposed amended complaint must stand alone; it must contain all of the plaintiff's claims. Here, the plaintiff does not give any explanation why he wishes to amend his complaint to add a new party, nor does he attach a proposed amended complaint to his motion. As a result, it is impossible to determine if the proposed amendment is permissible.
Moreover, on August 27, 2008, this court issued its Recommendation that Defendant Fender's motion for summary judgment be granted and that this case be dismissed in its entirety. The deadlines set in the preliminary scheduling conference have long passed. ( See Doc. No. 43.) Finally, Plaintiff failed to confer with opposing counsel before filing his motion to amend, as is required under D.C.COLOCivR 7.1A. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion (Doc. No. 136) is DENIED.