UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 22, 2010
LARY FEEZOR, PLAINTIFF,
SARBJIT S. KANG DBA KANG CHEVRON 2; KANG PROPERTY, INC.; HALEH AMIRI, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Through the present action Plaintiff Lary Feezor ("Plaintiff") seeks redress for alleged violations of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and related California statutes. Presently before the Court is a Motion by Plaintiff seeking leave to file a Second Amended Complaint.*fn1
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), once a responsive pleading has been served on a Plaintiff, the Plaintiff may only amend its pleading with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)-(2). The court should freely give leave when justice so requires. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Generally, the five factors of bad faith, undue delay, prejudice to opposing party, futility of amendment, and whether plaintiff has previously amended the complaint are considered when assessing the propriety of a motion to amend. Ahlmeyer v. Nevada Sys. of Higher Educ., 555 F.3d 1051, 1055 (9th Cir. 2009).
Here, Plaintiff seeks leave to amend so that he may add Dunnigan-Sacramento, LLC and Sacramento/Dunnigan Property, Inc. as defendants, and add to his complaint additional barriers he states he encountered at the subject facility. There is no apparent bad faith, undue delay, prejudice, or futility of amendment in Plaintiff's request. Furthermore, Defendants have not timely filed an opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Amend.
For these reasons, Plaintiff's Motion to Amend (Docket No. 15) is hereby GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.