SHUPE v. BANK OF AMERICA NA, CV-13-00019-TUC-JGZ (JR). (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20140617a84
Visitors: 11
Filed: Jun. 16, 2014
Latest Update: Jun. 16, 2014
Summary: ORDER JENNIFER G. ZIPPS, District Judge. Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Jacqueline M. Rateau that recommends denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend Complaint. (Docs. 80 and 105.) Plaintiffs filed their objections to the R&R on May 20, 2014 (doc. 110), and Defendant filed a response. (Doc. 115.) As thoroughly explained by Magistrate Judge Rateau, Plaintiffs' motion seeking to add a negligence claim at the close of discovery, if gran
Summary: ORDER JENNIFER G. ZIPPS, District Judge. Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Jacqueline M. Rateau that recommends denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend Complaint. (Docs. 80 and 105.) Plaintiffs filed their objections to the R&R on May 20, 2014 (doc. 110), and Defendant filed a response. (Doc. 115.) As thoroughly explained by Magistrate Judge Rateau, Plaintiffs' motion seeking to add a negligence claim at the close of discovery, if grant..
More
ORDER
JENNIFER G. ZIPPS, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Jacqueline M. Rateau that recommends denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend Complaint. (Docs. 80 and 105.) Plaintiffs filed their objections to the R&R on May 20, 2014 (doc. 110), and Defendant filed a response. (Doc. 115.) As thoroughly explained by Magistrate Judge Rateau, Plaintiffs' motion seeking to add a negligence claim at the close of discovery, if granted, would cause undue delay and unfairly prejudice to Defendant.1 See Johnson v. Buckley, 356 F.3d 1067, 1077 (9th Cir. 2004). Because Plaintiffs fail to explain their undue delay in bringing the negligence claim and also fail to undermine the analysis and proper conclusion reached by Magistrate Judge Rateau, the objections are rejected, and the Report and Recommendation is adopted.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
(1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 105) is accepted and adopted;
(2) Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. 80) is denied; and
(3) This Case remains referred to the Honorable Jacqueline M. Rateau for all pre-trial matters, and pleadings shall be filed under CV-13-00019-TUC-JGZ (JR).
FootNotes
1. Plaintiffs also re-raised a harassment claim that was previously withdrawn. Although Plaintiffs indicate in their objections that this was done in error, they do not formally move to withdraw this claim. (Doc. 110, p. 2.) Moreover, Defendant alleges that in addition to the new claims, Plaintiffs have also alleged new medical conditions that would require additional discovery. (Doc. 115, p. 3.)
Source: Leagle
