Alexander Harrison West v. PF Changs China Bistro

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Utah denied without prejudice Alexander Harrison West’s motion to amend his complaint against PF Changs China Bistro. The court found that the proposed amendment appeared materially different from the original complaint and contained an apparent defendant-identification error, and allowed Plaintiff 30 days to file a new motion to amend and amended complaint.

Holdings

1. The motion to amend is denied without prejudice because the proposed amendment materially differs from the original complaint and appears to have been filed in error, including its identification of a different defendant.
2. If Plaintiff files an amended complaint, it must stand on its own, must reallege all claims he intends to pursue, must identify what each named defendant did to violate his rights, and must separately state each cause of action with supporting facts and citations.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff's motion to amend should be granted when the proposed amendment materially differs from the original complaint and appears to identify a different defendant.
2. What pleading requirements Plaintiff must satisfy if he files a new amended complaint.

Disposition

other