Ubaldo Saldana-Garcia v. Brian Williams, et al.

District Court, D. Nevada

Ubaldo Saldana-Garcia v. Brian Williams, et al.

Trial Court Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 UBALDO SALDANA-GARCIA, Case No.: 2:19-cv-00441-APG-BNW

4 Petitioner Order Granting Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended § 2254 5 v. Petition

6 BRIAN WILLIAMS, et al., [ECF No. 75]

7 Respondents

8 Petitioner Ubaldo Saldana-Garcia seeks leave to file his second amended petition. ECF 9 No. 75. Respondents did not file an opposition to Saldana-Garcia’s motion and the time to do so 10 has expired. 11 In November 2021, the state district court issued an amended judgment of conviction 12 vacating and dismissing certain counts. ECF No. 48. In January 2024, I administratively closed 13 this habeas matter while Saldana-Garcia exhausted claims in state district court. ECF No. 66. In 14 March 2025, I granted Saldana-Garcia’s renewed motion to reopen and motion to extend time to 15 file a second amended petition. ECF Nos. 71-73. Saldana-Garcia now seeks leave to file his 16 second amended petition after returning to state district court following the issuance of the 17 amended judgment of conviction. ECF No. 75. 18 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), leave to amend should be freely given 19 “when justice so requires.” But leave to amend “is not to be granted automatically,” and the 20 court “considers the following five factors to assess whether to grant leave to amend: (1) bad 21 faith, (2) undue delay, (3) prejudice to the opposing party, (4) futility of amendment; and (5) 22 whether plaintiff has previously amended his complaint.” In re W. States Wholesale Natural Gas 23 Antitrust Litig.,

715 F.3d 716, 738

(9th Cir. 2013) (internal punctuation omitted). I find that 1}none of the factors above weighs against allowing the amendment sought here, especially as 2|| Respondents do not oppose Saldana-Garcia’s motion. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2) of 3]| the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, I find that leave file Saldana-Garcia’s second amended 4|| petition 1s appropriate. 5 I THEREFORE ORDER that Petitioner Ubaldo Saldana-Garcia’s Motion for Leave to 6|| File Document (ECF No. 75) is granted. 7 I further order that the Clerk of the Court is directed to file Saldana-Garcia’s second amended petition (ECF No. 75-1) on the docket. 9 DATED this 15th day of October, 2025.

M ANDREW P. GORDON D CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Reference

Status
Unknown