GEORGE FOLEY, JR., Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to File Second Amended Complaint (ECF No. 22), filed on November 12, 2018. To date, Defendants have not filed their responses and the time for opposition has now expired.
Plaintiff requests leave to file a second amended complaint to add three new parties whose names were unknown at the time that Plaintiff filed his first amended complaint, to clarify allegations through recently discovered information, and to add a claim of trespass to chattels. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 states that ". . . a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave. The Court should freely give leave when justice so requires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(b). There is a "strong policy to permit the amending of pleadings." Gabrielson v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 785 F.2d 762, 765 (9th Cir.1986) (quoting Howey v. United States, 481 F.2d 1187, 1190 (9th Cir.1973).
In addition, Local Rule 7-2(d) provides that "The failure of an opposing party to file points and authorities in response to any motion shall constitute a consent to the granting of the motion." Defendants did not file points and authorities in response to Plaintiff's instant motion. As a result, Defendants is considered to have consented to the granting of Plaintiff's motion under LR 7-2(d). The Court, therefore, grants Plaintiff's motion to file his second amended complaint. Accordingly,. . .