Tulare Local Health Care District et al v. California Department of Health Care Services et al

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-02711

ORDER by Judge Hamilton granting {{53}} Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint; ORDER Vacating Hearing Date. (pjhlc1, COURT STAFF)

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 TULARE LOCAL HEALTH CARE DISTRICT, et al., Case No. 15-cv-2711-PJH 8 Petitioners, 9 ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR v. LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT 10 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 11 HEALTH CARE SERVICES, et al., 12 Respondents. Northern District of California United States District Court 13 14 15 Petitioners in the above-entitled action seek leave to file an amended petition for 16 writ of mandate. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 requires that a plaintiff obtain either 17 consent of the defendant or leave of court to amend its complaint once the defendant has 18 answered, but "leave shall be freely given when justice so requires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 19 15(a); see also, e.g., Chodos v. West Pub. Co., 292 F.3d 992, 1003 (9th Cir. 2002) (leave 20 to amend granted with "extreme liberality"). Leave to amend is thus ordinarily granted 21 unless the amendment is futile, would cause undue prejudice to the defendants, or is 22 sought by plaintiffs in bad faith or with a dilatory motive. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 23 182 (1962); Smith v. Pac. Props. & Dev. Corp., 358 F.3d 1097, 1101 (9th Cir. 2004). 24 Respondents oppose the motion, arguing that amending the petition will be futile, 25 and that they will be prejudiced thereby. Having read the parties' papers and carefully 26 considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, the court hereby GRANTS 27 the motion. The court finds no obvious prejudice to respondents from the filing of an 28 amended petition, and finds further that the applicability of the recent decision in Hoag 1 Mem. Hosp. Presbyterian v. Price, 866 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2017), can be addressed in 2 the cross-motions for summary judgment. 3 The hearing on the motion for leave to amend, previously noticed for October 4, 4 2017, is VACATED. No later than Monday, October 2, 2017, petitioners shall file the 5 amended petition as a stand-alone document. Thereafter, the parties shall meet and 6 confer and submit a stipulation as to the briefing schedule for the cross-motions that were 7 previously scheduled to be filed on October 4, 2017. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 Dated: September 27, 2017 11 __________________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON 12 Northern District of California United States District Judge United States District Court 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2