1:06-CV-01559 OWW GSA.United States District Court, E.D. California.
June 9, 2009
ORDER GRANTING CITY OF FRESNO’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND VACATING HEARING ON SAME (DOC. 123)
OLIVER WANGER, District Judge
This case arises from Defendants’ allegedly unlawful pollution and contamination of soil and groundwater in connection with their repair, maintenance, overhaul, and refurbishing of aircraft at the former World War II military base, Hammer Field Army Air Base, more commonly known as the Old Hammer Field (“OHF”). The First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) alleges violations of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”); the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”); California’s Hazardous Substances Account Act (“HSAA”); and various related state law doctrines. Doc. 15, filed Jan. 17, 2007.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), the City of Fresno (“City”) moves for leave to file a Second Amended
Page 2
Complaint (“SAC”). Doc. 123. This motion is in compliance with the April 17, 2009 Scheduling Order, which lifted a prior stay in this case and set the date for amendment of the City’s complaint on or before May 18, 2009. Doc. 122. Defendants refused to consent to amendment prior to the filing of the motion to amend on May 18, 2009, but filed notices of non-opposition on June 5, 2009. See Docs. 125 126.
The SAC does not set forth any new claims or parties. Rather, as discussed during the Scheduling Conference, the SAC includes new allegations regarding the presence of a contaminant at OHF, of which Plaintiff was not previously aware. This allegation may impact the scope and length of the clean up at issue in this action. In addition, the SAC clarifies and emphasizes certain facts supporting its original claims, and includes updated facts that have changed since the FAC was filed in January 2007.
Leave to amend should be freely given when justice so requires. Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 15(a)(2). There is no opposition to the motion to amend, and good cause has been shown for the amendment. Plaintiff’s motion to file the SAC is GRANTED. The SAC shall be deemed filed as of the date of this order. The hearing on this motion is VACATED.
SO ORDERED
Page 1