Lopez v. General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc.

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 VERONICA B. LOPEZ, individually, and Case No. 24-cv-01743-BAS-DEB on behalf of all others similarly situated, 12 ORDER GRANTING JOINT Plaintiff, 13 MOTION TO FILE FIRST v. AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF No. 14 4) GENERAL DYNAMICS 15 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INC.,

16 Defendant. 17 18 Presently before the Court is the parties’ joint motion to grant Plaintiff leave to file 19 a First Amended Complaint against General Dynamics Information Technology, Inc. (ECF 20 No. 4.) 21 “In general, a court should liberally allow a party to amend its pleading.” Sonoma 22 Cty. Ass’n of Retired Emps. v. Sonoma Cty., 708 F.3d 1109, 1117 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing 23 Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)); see also Owens v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan, Inc., 244 F.3d 708, 24 712 (9th Cir. 2001) (“A district court shall grant leave to amend freely when justice so 25 requires.’”). Further, a party may amend its pleading without a court order where the 26 opposing party consents in writing. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). 27 Here, considering (i) the broad policy favoring amendments to pleadings and (ii) 28 the parties’ joint motion, which indicates Defendant’s consent to the amendment, the Court 1 || GRANTS the joint motion for leave to file a First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 4.) 2 || Plaintiff shall file her First Amended Complaint on or before November 25, 2024. 3 || Defendant shall file a responsive pleading on or before December 9, 2024. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 A , 6 || DATED: October 24, 2024 Ypilag (Lyohaa 6 7 United States District Judge 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28