Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Alma Clarisa Hernandez, Theresa v. Vallco International Shopping

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


December 13, 2010

ALMA CLARISA HERNANDEZ, THERESA
WALLEN, RONALD MOORE,
PLAINTIFFS,
v.
VALLCO INTERNATIONAL SHOPPING
CENTER, LLC, ET AL.
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lucy H. Koh United States District Judge

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs filed their complaint, alleging violations of Title III of the Americans with

Disabilities Act, on June 29, 2010. See Compl. (Dkt. No. 1). Defendants are a large number of 19 different business entities and associated individuals, all apparently located in the Vallco 20

International Shopping Center. Id. On October 15, 2010, Plaintiffs moved for leave to amend the 21 complaint to substitute certain incorrectly-named defendants with properly-named defendants, to 22 correct paragraph numbering, and to cure other "miscellaneous defects" in the original pleading. 23

See Motion to Amend (Dkt. No. 160) at 2. The Court has determined that this matter is suitable for 24 determination without oral argument, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b). Accordingly, the 25 hearing currently set for Thursday, December 16, 2010 is hereby VACATED. 26

Ten Defendants filed statements of non-opposition to this motion; no Defendant has filed

27 any opposition. As Plaintiffs note in their motion, leave to amend the complaint shall be "freely 28 given when justice so requires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Unless there is a showing of "undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies 2 by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance 3 of the amendment, futility of amendment, etc." then leave should be "freely given." Forman v. 4 Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2)). 5

No Defendant has opposed Plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend the complaint, and based 6 on the papers submitted, it appears Plaintiffs' request is in the interest of justice as the proposed 7 amendments will correctly name a number of parties that were previously improperly named. 8

Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS the Plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint as indicated 9 in the Motion to Amend. However, Plaintiffs are not granted leave to amend any unspecified 10 "miscellaneous defects" beyond non-substantive changes such as formatting, paragraph numbering, and the like.

For the Northern District of California

IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Court

20101213

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.