1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TEAGAN PETERSEN, an individual, Case No.: 3:22-CV-668-RSH-DEB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR 13 v. LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT 14 FCA US, LLC, A Delaware Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1 through 15 20, inclusive, 16 Defendants. 17 18 On June 29, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Motion For Leave To Amend (“Motion”). ECF 19 No. 11. The Motion seeks to add a third cause of action for violation of the Magnuson- 20 Moss Warranty Act. Defendant does not oppose the amendment. ECF No. 11 at 2. 21 The district court should “freely give leave [to amend] when justice so requires.” 22 Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). The court considers five factors in determining whether a motion 23 for leave to amend is appropriate: “bad faith, undue delay, prejudice to the opposing 24 party, futility of amendment, and whether the plaintiff has previously amended the 25 complaint.” Johnson v. Buckley,

(9th Cir. 2004). Here, and as 26 explained in the Motion (ECF No. 11 at 3-5), none of those five factors weigh against 27 granting leave to amend. The Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion. Pursuant to 28 // CivLR 15.1(b), Plaintiff is ordered to file and serve its amended complaint within seven 2 (7) days from the date of this order. ° IT IS SO ORDERED. fekut lbw 5 ||Dated: July 5, 2022 6 Hon. Robert S. Huie 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