Dominguez v. Archambeault

Opinion

1 5 Dominguez, Case No.: 20cv1384-JO-AHG Plaintitt | ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’ Vv. MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT Archambeault et al, PLEADINGS Defendants. On March 26, 2021, Petitioner Ramon Dominguez, currently detained in civi /immigration detention at the Imperial Regional Detention Facility (IRDF) and □□□□□□□□□□ ||pro se, filed a Third Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. | 2241. Dkt. 13 (“Petition”). Petitioner seeks immediate release from Immigration an: Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody, alleging unconstitutional conditions of confinemen posed by COVID-19 and other factors in violation of his Fifth Amendment due proces tights. See id. On February 22, 2022, Petitioner filed a motion to supplement pleading 47 and/or to add to the record. Dkt. 26. Respondents do not oppose the motion. Dkt. 28.

Requests to supplement a pleading are governed by Rule 15(d), which provides that “[o}]n motion and reasonable notice, the court may, on just terms, permit a party to serve a supplemental pleading setting out any transaction, occurrence, or event that happened after date of the pleading to be supplemented.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d). “The purpose of Rule 15(d) is to promote as complete an adjudication of the dispute between the parties as }possible.” William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Cont'l Baking Co., 668 F.2d 1014, (9th Cir. 1981). Rule 15(d) is liberally construed absent a showing of prejudice to the opposing party. Keith v. Volpe, 858 F.2d 467, 475 (9th Cir. 1988); LaSalvia v. United Dairymen of Ariz., 804 F.2d 1113, 1119 (9th Cir. 1986). The court has broad discretion to permit a supplemental pleading. Keith, 858 F.2d at 473. 1] In this case, Petitioner requests to supplement his pleading with exhibits that post- the Petition to support his claims of unconstitutional conditions of confinement. For }example, the exhibits include grievances filed against IRDF, medical records, and news larticles and reports that occurred after the date the Petition was filed. The exhibits relate Petitioner’s claims and serve to promote a more complete adjudication of the dispute between the parties. Moreover, there is no showing of prejudice to Respondents, who have not opposed the motion. Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion to supplement is GRANTED. } ITIS SO ORDERED. || Dated: b| 1 ) EV Honorable Jinsook Ohta 54 United States District Judge