(PC) Pierre-Jones v. Campos

Opinion

DAVID PIERRE-JONES, Case No.: 1:23-cv-1372-NODJ-SKO (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE v. TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT

I. CAMPOS, et al., (Doc. 9) Defendants. Plaintiff David Pierre-Jones is proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action was removed to this Court from the Kings County Superior Court on September 15, 2023, by Defendants Campos-Garcia and Placencia. (See Doc. 1.) On September 20, 2023, this Court issued its First Informational Order In Prisoner/Civil Detainee Civil Rights Case. (Doc. 5.) On October 12, 2023, Plaintiff submitted correspondence to the Court, “seeking to amend [his] complaint and file a motion in the courtroom [he’s] been appointed to.” (Doc. 7.) The Court issued its Order Regarding Plaintiff’s Request to Amend the Complaint on October 16, 2023. (Doc. 8.) The Order directed Plaintiff to file any motion for leave to file an amended complaint, accompanied by the proposed amended complaint,” within 30 days of the date of service of the order. (Id. at 4.) On November 1, 2023, Plaintiff filed a “Motion For Leave To File An Amended Complaint” and an amended civil rights complaint. (See Docs. 9 & 10.) Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a party may amend its pleading “only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave” where amendment as a matter of course is not available. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). The rule further provides “[t]he court should freely give leave when justice so requires.” Id.; see also Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. Rose, 893 F.2d 1074, 1079 (9th Cir. 1990) (stating that leave to amend is to be granted with “extreme liberality”). “The power to grant leave to amend, however, is entrusted to the discretion of the district court, which determines the propriety of a motion to amend by ascertaining the presence of any of four factors: bad faith, undue delay, prejudice to the opposing party, and/or futility.” Serra v. Lappin, 600 F.3d 1191, 1200 (9th Cir. 2010) (quotation marks & citation omitted). Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint will be granted. The Court will screen the amended complaint, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, in due course. Once the Court determines Plaintiff has stated a cognizable claim or claims, Defendants will then be directed to file a responsive pleading to the operative complaint. For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The motion for leave to file an amended complaint (Doc. 9) is GRANTED; and 2. The Court will screen Plaintiff’s amended complaint, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, in due course. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 13, 2023 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE