United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND
W. Christel United States Magistrate Judge
District Court has referred this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action
to United States Magistrate Judge David W. Christel.
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Michael Denton's
Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint
(“Motion”). Dkt. 95. The Court concludes the
interests of justice require giving leave to amend.
Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion (Dkt. 95) is granted and
Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 97) is
denied without prejudice.
Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff alleges his
constitutional rights under the First and Eighth Amendments
were violated while he was incarcerated. Dkt. 64. Plaintiff
also contends that Defendants violated his rights under the
Americans with Disabilities Act. Id. In the Motion,
Plaintiff seeks to add Lieutenant Daniel Bayer as a
defendant. Dkt. 95.
initiated this lawsuit on January 5, 2018. Dkt. 1. On
February 14, 2018, the Court, having screened Plaintiff's
Complaint, ordered Plaintiff to show cause or file an Amended
Complaint because of deficiencies identified in the
Complaint. Dkt. 7. Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on
March 5, 2018. Dkt. 11. On March 7, 2018, the Court, having
screened Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, ordered Plaintiff
to show cause or file a Second Amended Complaint because of
deficiencies identified in the Amended Complaint. Dkt. 12.
Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint on April 10, 2018.
6, 2018, the Court dismissed Plaintiff's claims against
several Defendants and gave Plaintiff leave to file an
additional amended complaint based on the surviving claims.
Dkt. 21, 24. On November 20, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Motion
for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint. Dkt. 60. The
Court granted Plaintiff's motion, and Plaintiff filed the
Second Amended Complaint as the operative complaint on
December 21, 2018. Dkt. 63, 64.
discovery period ended on August 7, 2019. Dkt. 85, 89. On
August 15, 2019, Plaintiff filed the Motion. Dkt. 95.
Defendants filed a Response to the Motion on August 26, 2019,
requesting the Court deny Plaintiff's Motion. Dkt. 110.
Plaintiff filed his Reply on August 30, 2019. Dkt. 112, 113.
the Motion was filed, but prior to filing their Response to
the Motion, on August 21, 2019, Defendants filed a Motion for
Summary Judgment. Dkt. 97.
to Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
(1) Amending as a Matter of Course
A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course
within: (A) 21 days after serving it, or
(B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is
required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or
21 days after service of a motion under Rule ...