Porter v. Yuba City Police Dept.

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 Quiana Lei Porter, No. 2:20-cv-01554-KJM-DB 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. Yuba City Police Dept., et al., 1S Defendants.

17 Quiana Lei Porter acting pro se filed her first complaint in August 2020, Compl., ECF | No. 1, which the assigned magistrate judge dismissed for failure to state a claim, Order, ECF | No.3. Having been granted leave to amend, Porter filed the First Amended Complaint in | February 2021, First Am. Compl., ECF No. 7. Defendants have not answered, and the matter has | not been scheduled. Porter now moves for leave to file a Second Amended Complaint. Mot., | ECF No. 15. Porter and her new counsel, Substitution of Counsel, ECF No. 6, having reviewed | the relevant evidence, seek to correct “certain facts .. . in the operative complaint to make a clear | record of the events that had actually transpired.” Mot. at 1. They also seek to add the | appropriate names of some defendants. /d. The motion is unopposed and submitted. Min. Order, | ECF No. 17.

27 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) states “[t]he court should freely give leave [to | amend] when justice so requires” and the Ninth Circuit has “stressed Rule 15’s policy of favoring | amendments.” Ascon Properties, Inc. v. Mobil Oil Co., 866 F.2d 1149, 1160 (9th Cir. 1989).

2 | However, courts may decline to grant leave to amend only if there is strong evidence of ‘undue | delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies | by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance | of the amendment, [or] futility of amendment, etc.’” See Sonoma Cty. Ass’n of Retired Emps. v. | Sonoma Cty., 708 F.3d 1109, 1117 (9th Cir. 2013) (quoting Foman vy. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 | (1962)). Given the early stage of this case and the fact defendants have not yet appeared, the | court does not find there is any undue prejudice or undue delay. Furthermore, there is no | evidence of any other factors that would persuade the court decline to grant leave to amend.

10 Accordingly, the court grants the motion. Plaintiff shall have 21 days to file a Second | Amended Complaint.

12 This order resolves ECF No. 15.

13 IT IS SO ORDERED.

14 DATED: July 20, 2021.

17 CHIEF ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE