Kristeena Tinnin v. Sutter Valley Medical Foundation ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KRISTEENA TINNIN, Case No. 1:20-cv-00482-NONE-EPG 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND 14 SUTTER VALLEY MEDICAL FOUNDATION, (ECF No. 10) 15 Defendant. 16 17 18 Currently pending before the Court is Plaintiff Kristeena Tinnin’s (“Plaintiff”) motion for 19 leave to file a First Amended Class Action Complaint. (Doc. No. 10.) The Court found the matter 20 suitable for decision without the need for oral argument pursuant to Local Rule 230(g) and 21 vacated the hearing on the motion set for January 8, 2021. (Doc. No. 14.) Having considered 22 Plaintiff’s motion, Defendant’s response, and the record in this case, the Court will grant the 23 motion for leave to amend. 24 On October 1, 2020, the Court held a Scheduling Conference and set a deadline of 25 November 6, 2020 for Plaintiff to file a motion to amend the complaint. (ECF No. 8.) On 26 November 25, 2020, Plaintiff filed her motion to amend the complaint seeking to include a rest 27 break claim and class claims. (ECF Nos. 10, 10-3, 10-4.) 28 /// 1 On December 23, 2020, Defendant Sutter Valley Medical Foundation (“Defendant”) filed 2 a response to the motion stating that it does not oppose amendment of the complaint but objected 3 to a provision in Plaintiff’s proposed order granting Defendant only ten (10) days to file a 4 response to the proposed First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 13.) Defendant instead requests 5 twenty-one (21) days to file a response because it is contemplating a motion to stay, strike, or 6 dismiss the class claims due to two earlier-filed class actions alleging the same set of claims. (Id.) 7 Plaintiff did not file a reply. 8 A party seeking to amend a pleading after the date specified in a scheduling order must 9 first show good cause for amendment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b). Johnson v. 10 Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 608 (9th Cir. 1992) (citation omitted). If good cause is 11 shown, the party must then demonstrate that amendment is proper under Federal Rule of Civil 12 Procedure 15. Id. Under Rule 15, a party may amend a pleading once as a matter of course within 13 21 days of service, or if the pleading is one to which a response is required, 21 days after service 14 of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f). Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). “In all other cases, a party may 15 amend its pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. 16 Civ. P. 15(a)(2). 17 Here, Plaintiff’s motion was supported by a declaration of counsel Juan Gamboa 18 explaining that the motion was not filed before the November 6, 2020 deadline because the 19 pleading amendment deadline was inadvertently calendared incorrectly, and counsel promptly 20 filed the motion upon realizing the mistake. (ECF Nos. 10, 10-2.) Further, this case is in the early 21 stages and Defendant has provided written consent to amendment. Accordingly, the Court finds 22 good cause for amendment and will grant the motion. The Court will further grant Defendant’s 23 request for twenty-one (21) days to file a response to the First Amended Complaint. 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 25 1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 10) is 26 GRANTED; 27 2. Within seven (7) days of the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall file her First Amended Complaint, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 2 (ECF No. 10-4) to the motion; and 28 1 5. Defendant’s response to the First Amended Complaint shall be filed and served 2 | within twenty-one (21) days of service of the First Amended Complaint. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. S| Dated: _ January 14, 2021 [see hey 6 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28