Lundstrom v. Young

Opinion

BRIAN LUNDSTROM, Case No.: 18-cv-2856-GPC

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING LIGAND’S v. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND ANSWER AND DEFENSES TO CARLA YOUNG, an individual; SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT LIGAND PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; LIGAND PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. [ECF No. 146] 401(K) PLAN; and DOES 1 through 20, Defendant. On February 23, 2023, Defendants Ligand Pharmaceuticals and Ligand Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 401(k) Plan (“Defendants” or collectively “Ligand”) filed a Motion for Leave to Amend Answer and Defenses to the Second Amended Complaint. ECF No. 146. The Court set a briefing schedule. ECF No. 147. On March 17, 2023, Plaintiff Brian Lundstrom (“Plaintiff” or “Lundstrom”) filed a Non-Opposition. ECF No. 153. A party seeking to amend a pleading past a scheduling order deadline must show “good cause” for such relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4). A court should grant leave to amend a pleading “freely” and “when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). A court should determine whether the moving party was diligent in seeking amendment and whether there is sufficient prejudice to the non-moving party to justify denial of the motion to amend. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). The Court finds that Ligand was diligent in seeking amendment and that Plaintiff is not seriously prejudiced by amendment at this stage, indeed Plaintiff does not oppose the amendment. See ECF No. 153. Because “[R]ule 15’s policy of favoring amendments to pleadings should be applied with extreme liberality,” the Court hereby GRANTS Ligand’s Motion, and VACATKES the hearing currently scheduled for April 7, 2023. Defendant Ligand shall file its amended answer within two (2) days of this Order’s issuance. Dated: March 21, 2023 =<

United States District Judge 18-cv-2856-GPC