Courtesy Automotive Group, Inc. v. Subaru of America, Inc.

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ----oo0oo---- COURTESY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC., No. 2:22-cv-00997 WBS DMC dba COURTESY SUBARU OF CHICO, Plaintiff, 14 ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS v. AND REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO 15 AMEND COMPLAINT SUBARU OF AMERICA, INC. and DOES 1-50, inclusive, 17 Defendant.

19 ----oo0oo---- 20 Plaintiff Courtesy Automotive Group, Inc. (“Courtesy”) requests the court grant leave to amend the operative complaint.

22 (See Opp’n (Docket No. 21) at 35.) A party seeking amendment must show that the amendment is proper under Rule 15, see Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 608 (9th Cir. 1992) (citations omitted), under which leave to amend should be given “freely . . . when justice so requires,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Leave should be denied only if amendment (1) would cause prejudice to the opposing party, (2) is sought in bad faith, (3) would create undue delay, or (4) is futile. Chudacoff v. Univ. Med. Ctr. of S. Nev., 649 F.3d 1143, 1152 (9th Cir. 2011) (citation omitted). “[I]f a court finds that good cause exists, it should then deny a motion for leave to amend only if such amendment would be futile.” J & J Sports Prods., Inc. v. Maravilla, 2:12-cv-2899 WBS EFB, 2013 WL 4780764, at *1 (E.D.

7 Cal. Sept. 5, 2013).

8 Plaintiff’s request is based on the ground that subsequent events since filing the initial complaint provide good cause for amendment, including various decisions by the Alameda County Superior Court and the California New Motor Vehicle Board that resolved issues relevant to the instant motion to dismiss.

13 (Opp’n at 35.) Plaintiff attaches redlined and clean copies of its proposed amended complaint. (See id. Exs. 7, 8.) Defendant opposes the request on the ground that amendment would be futile.

16 (Reply (Docket No. 22) at 14-15.)

17 The court cannot conclude that plaintiff’s proposed amendments are necessary futile because they bear directly on the nature of plaintiff’s contractual obligations to defendant, and whether plaintiff was in material breach of those obligations.

21 Further, they allege events postdating the initial complaint which form plaintiff’s basis for expanding the scope of attorneys’ fees requested. Finally, the court sees no reasons why granting leave to amend would prejudice defendant, and defendant identifies none. Upon amendment, defendant is free to challenge the legal sufficiency of plaintiff’s claims, amended or otherwise.

28 Good cause appearing, and because amendment would not eee eee eee I EI ED OE be futile, plaintiff’s request to file its amended complaint is hereby GRANTED. See Johnson, 975 F.2d at 609; J & J Sports Prods., 2013 WL 4780764, at *1. Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Docket No. 20) is hereby DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as moot, and the hearing set for October 2, 2023 is hereby VACATED. Plaintiff is directed to file its amended complaint within ten days of the issuance of this Order.

8 IT IS SO ORDERED. ' ak. a bean, (hi.

9 Dated: September 27, 2023 WILLIAMB.SHUBB 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE