[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT CITY OF SACRAMENTO'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

[PROPOSED] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.

On July 9, 2014, the Court held a hearing on Defendant City of Sacramento's Motion for Summary Judgment. Present on behalf of Plaintiffs were Charles A. Pacheco, Esq., and Sofia Reamer, Esq., of Pacheco & Reamer. Present on behalf of Defendant was Sean D.

Richmond, Esq., of the Sacramento City Attorney's Office. As Defendant's Motion was UNOPPOSED it was thereby granted.

On July 9, 2014, the Court held a hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint. Present on behalf of Plaintiffs were Charles A. Pacheco, Esq., and Sofia Reamer, Esq., of Pacheco & Reamer. Present on behalf of Defendant was Sean D. Richmond, Esq., of the Sacramento City Attorney's Office. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), Plaintiffs sought to amend their First Amended Complaint to name City of Sacramento Police Department Officers Michael Severi and Clinton Ryan Trefethen as individual defendants.

Pursuant to Fed, R. Civ. P. 16(b), the Court held that Plaintiffs did not demonstrate good cause to modify the Court's Pretrial Scheduling Order of August 30, 2013, wherein it was ordered there were to be no further amendments to the pleadings and all fictitious defendants were dismissed as of the date of said Order. As Defendant produced to Plaintiff its entire investigative report related to the shooting of Ascencion Herrera, Jr., on May 23, 2013, wherein the identities of Officers Severi and Trefethen and their respective involvement in the shooting was unequivocally set forth, the Court held that Plaintiffs were dilatory in not seeking to amend the Pretrial Scheduling Order and their First Amended Complaint until June 4, 2014.

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2), the Court held that Plaintiffs acted with undue delay in filing their Motion For Leave to Amend based on the aforementioned fact that Plaintiffs knew, or should have known of the respective involvement of Officers Seven and Trefethen related to the shooting of Ascencion Herrera, Jr., no later than May 23, 2013.

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendant City of Sacramento's Motion for Summary Judgment is UNOPPOSED and thereby GRANTED;

2. Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint is DENIED;

3. The entirety of Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint is thereby DISMISSED with PREJUDICE.