Luis Riofrio Anda v. Ralston Purina, Co., Luis Riofrio Anda v. Ralston Purina, Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• relying on Rule 16(b) in refusing to allow an amendment after the scheduling order deadline despite the lenient standards of Rule 15(a)
• permitting amendment under 19 Rule 15(a) in violation of district court scheduling order “would have nullified the purpose of 20 Rule 16(b)(1)”
• permitting 9 | amendment under Rule 15(a) in violation of district court scheduling order “would have nullified 10 | the purpose of Rule 16(b)(1)”
• allowing plaintiff to amend nearly two months after deadline to do so had expired “would have nullified the purpose of [R]ule 16(b)(1)”
• disallowing amendment of complaint two months after deadline in court’s scheduling order
• action based on broker’s violations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).