The opinion of the court was delivered by: Edward J. Davila United States District Judge
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT [Re: Docket No. 9, 13]
United States District Court For the Northern District of California
Presently before the court are Plaintiff Sammy Cuevas's ("Plaintiff") Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint, and Defendants City of Campbell, Daniel Rich, Greg Finch, and 19 Does 1-25's (collectively, "Defendants") Motion to Dismiss. For the reasons set forth below, the 20 court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Leave, and DENIES Defendant's Motion to Dismiss as 21 moot. 22
This case concerns Plaintiff's termination from his position as a police officer with the Campbell Police Department for allegedly associating with persons engaged in criminal activity 25 and failing to report those associations to his superiors. Plaintiff filed this action on May 9, 2012 in 26 the Santa Clara County Superior Court asserting causes of action under California common law 27 breach of employment contract and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants removed the matter, and the 28 case was reassigned to this court on June 19, 2012. Several days later, on June 22, 2012, 2
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). 3
Plaintiff filed an opposition to that motion on July 6, 2012. That motion is now pending before this 4 court. Plaintiff had the opportunity to amend his complaint as of right until July 27, 2012 pursuant 5 to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1) but failed to do so. Several weeks later, on September 6
Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2). Defendants oppose the motion. 8
10 should freely give leave when justice so requires"); Morongo Band of Mission Indians v.
7, 2012, Plaintiff filed this motion seeking leave to file an amended complaint pursuant to Federal 7
Leave to amend is generally granted with liberality. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) ("The court
Rose, 893 F.2d 1074, 1079 (9th Cir. 1990). Leave need not be granted, however, where the 12 amendment of the complaint would cause the opposing party undue prejudice, is sought in bad 13 faith, constitutes an exercise in futility, or creates undue delay. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 14
(1962); Janicki Logging Co. v. Mateer, 42 F.3d 561, 566 (9th Cir. 1994). Not all of the Rule 15 15 considerations are created equal; "it is the consideration of prejudice to the opposing party that 16 carries the greatest weight." ...