Katie Ann Barcelo and Justin Roberts v. City of San Diego, et al.

S.D. California

Katie Ann Barcelo and Justin Roberts v. City of San Diego, et al.

DecidedApril 30, 2026

Docket3:25-cv-00329

StatusUnknown

This text of Katie Ann Barcelo and Justin Roberts v. City of San Diego, et al. (Katie Ann Barcelo and Justin Roberts v. City of San Diego, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Katie Ann Barcelo and Justin Roberts v. City of San Diego, et al., (S.D. Cal. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 |} KATIE ANN BARCELO and JUSTIN Case No. 25-cv-0329-BAS-AHG ROBERTS, Plaintiffs ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ 13 ° UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE 14 V. TO FILE THIRD AMENDED 15 CITY OF SAN DIEGO, et al., (ECF No 40), 16 Defendants. 17 Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Third 18 || Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 40.) “In general, a court should liberally allow a party to 19 |}amend its pleading.” Sonoma Cty. Ass’n of Retired Emps. v. Sonoma Cnty., 708 F.3d 20 1109, 1117 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)); see also Owens v. Kaiser Found. 21 || Health Plan, Inc., 244 F.3d 708, 712 (9th Cir. 2001) (“A district court ‘shall grant leave 22 amend freely ‘when justice so requires.’”). Having reviewed and considered Plaintiffs’ 23 || Unopposed Motion (ECF No. 40), the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ leave to file their Third 24 || Amended Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Plaintiffs shall file their Third Amended 25 ||Complaint on the docket no later than May 7, 2026. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 28 || DATED: April 30, 2026 (i Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge _United States District Court

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 |} KATIE ANN BARCELO and JUSTIN Case No. 25-cv-0329-BAS-AHG ROBERTS, Plaintiffs ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ 13 ° UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE 14 V. TO FILE THIRD AMENDED 15 CITY OF SAN DIEGO, et al., (ECF No 40), 16 Defendants. 17 Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Third 18 || Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 40.) “In general, a court should liberally allow a party to 19 |}amend its pleading.” Sonoma Cty. Ass’n of Retired Emps. v. Sonoma Cnty., 708 F.3d 20 1109, 1117 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)); see also Owens v. Kaiser Found. 21 || Health Plan, Inc., 244 F.3d 708, 712 (9th Cir. 2001) (“A district court ‘shall grant leave 22 amend freely ‘when justice so requires.’”). Having reviewed and considered Plaintiffs’ 23 || Unopposed Motion (ECF No. 40), the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ leave to file their Third 24 || Amended Complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Plaintiffs shall file their Third Amended 25 ||Complaint on the docket no later than May 7, 2026. 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 28 || DATED: April 30, 2026 (i Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge _United States District Court

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Katie Ann Barcelo and Justin Roberts v. City of San Diego, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/katie-ann-barcelo-and-justin-roberts-v-city-of-san-diego-et-al-casd-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack