TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Clinton B. Johnson’s Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint is DENIED.

Plaintiff Clinton B. Johnson to give notice. 

REASONING

A motion for leave to amend must: 

(1) Include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading, which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous pleadings or amendments;

(2) State what allegations in the previous pleading are proposed to be deleted, if any, and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the deleted allegations are located; and

(3) State what allegations are proposed to be added to the previous pleading, if any, and where, by page, paragraph, and line number, the additional allegations are located.

(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(a).) 

Further, a separate declaration must accompany the motion and must specify the following:

(1) The effect of the amendment;

(2) Why the amendment is necessary and proper;

(3) When the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered; and

(4) The reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier.

(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(b).)

Plaintiff Clinton B. Johnson (“Plaintiff”) moves the Court for leave to file a First Amended Complaint in this action to add Genesis Motor America (“Genesis”) as a defendant based on a belief that Genesis is the manufacturer of the vehicle, and the complaint mistakenly identified Defendant Hyundai Motor America (“Defendant”) as the manufacturer, and Plaintiff also seeks to add a prayer for damages under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act. Defendant opposes the motion on the grounds that Plaintiff has no “new facts” to support his request for an amendment, as he knew or should have known of the facts when he purchased the subject vehicle, and at the latest he knew of the facts since February 2024, but he delayed in moving to amend the complaint, and he also knew of the facts underlying the proposed prayer for damages under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act well before he filed this motion.

While Plaintiff has provided a copy of the proposed First Amended Complaint (Mot., Ratliff Decl. ¶ 12, Ex. 8) and generally identified the proposed amendments, Plaintiff otherwise fails to meet the procedural requirements of bringing a motion for leave to file an amended pleading. First, Plaintiff fails to set forth the amendments by paragraph, paragraph, and line number, instead simply providing a copy of the proposed pleading. Second, Plaintiff fails to set forth facts showing diligent movement in seeking to amend because Plaintiff represents, albeit not in his declaration, that he was aware of the facts underlying the amendment on February 14, 2024, but he did not make this motion until almost a year later without any explanation for the delay. (Mot., p. 2, ll. 19-21; Ratliff Decl. ¶ 7.) Third, Defendant provides evidence that Plaintiff may have been aware of the facts since 2022, when Plaintiff purchased the vehicle, as the warranty booklet provided with the vehicle would have identified Genesis as the warrantor. (Opp’n, Willette Decl. ¶ 4.) Moreover, Defendant has litigated this case based on different claims, such that delay will certainly prejudice Defendant in requiring the case to be restarted from the beginning. Accordingly, Plaintiff Clinton B. Johnson’s Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint is DENIED.