govinfo:USCOURTS-casd-3_25-cv-01742-1

1 
25-CV-1742-GPC-BLM 
 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
JAMES PATRICK HAYES, an 
individual, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, EL CAJON 
POLICE DEPARTMENT, KELLY 
MARTINEZ in her individual capacity, 
JEREMIAH LARSON in his individual 
capacity, SHERIFF’S DEPUTY DOES 1-
10, 
Defendants. 

 
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S LETTER 
TO THE COURT 
 
[ECF No. 40] 
 
 
 
 On June 4, 2026, Plaintiff James Hayes—currently proceeding pro se—filed a letter 
with the Court. ECF No. 40. The letter discusse s Plaintiff’s current circumstances and 
unsuccessful attempts to retain counsel, as well as the factual allegations giving rise to his 
claims. Id. The letter also discusses various additional topics that seemingly do not relate 
to the case before the Court. Id. 
Case 3:25-cv-01742-GPC-JAC Document 41 Filed 06/10/26 PageID.<pageID> 
Page 1 of 2
 
 
2 
25-CV-1742-GPC-BLM 
 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
 At the end of the letter, Plaintiff note s that “I wish to amend the initial complaint 
filed on my behalf to address the injustices suffered while in custody multiple times as well 
as continued lies about me threatening my liberty[.]” ECF No. 40, at 6. 
Per Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2), Plaintiff can amend his complaint 
either (1) with the opposing party’s written consent, or (2) with leave from the Court. Fed. 
R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). If Plaintiff cannot obtain consent from the opposing party, then he 
should file a motion for leave to file an amended complaint with the Court. 
Leave to amend shall be freely given “when justice so requires. ” Fed. R. Civ. P. 
15(a)(2). This policy is applied “with extreme liberality.” Eminence Cap., LLC v. Aspeon, 
Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir. 2003) (quoting Owens v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan, 
Inc., 244 F.3d 708, 712 (9th Cir. 2001)). 
When considering whether to grant leave to amend, courts consider factors 
including “undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated 
failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed , undue prejudice to the 
opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, [and] futility of amendment.” 
Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). In the Ninth Circuit, “it is the consideration of 
prejudice to the opposing party that carries the greatest weight.” Eminence Cap., LLC, 316 
F.3d at 1052. “Absent prejudice, or a strong showing of any of the remaining Foman 
factors, there exists a presumption under [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 15(a) in favor 
of granting leave to amend.” Id (emphasis in original). 
If Plaintiff seeks to amend his complaint, the Court DIRECTS Plaintiff to follow 
the procedures outlined in Rule 15 and either (1) obtain consent from the opposing party 
or (2) file a motion for leave to file an amended complaint with the Court. 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
Dated: June 10, 2026 
Case 3:25-cv-01742-GPC-JAC Document 41 Filed 06/10/26 PageID.<pageID> 
Page 2 of 2

Passage view · GavelSight