Faris v. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky denied Michael Faris’s motion for leave to amend his complaint in litigation challenging enforcement of a federal airline mask mandate. The court found undue delay, prejudice, and futility because the proposed claims largely repeated previously rejected claims and would face procedural and federal-preemption obstacles.

Holdings

1. Leave to amend under Rule 15(a)(2) was properly denied because Faris waited more than four years, offered no adequate explanation for the delay, and sought to repackage claims arising from the same events after prior claims had been dismissed or resolved by judgment.
2. The proposed amendment was futile because the previously rejected federal, contract, and California Unruh Act claims would not fare better when repleaded, and the proposed state-law claims appeared subject to the same federal preemption that had defeated several prior state tort claims.
3. Rule 15 does not provide a backdoor means of obtaining another opportunity to litigate claims after judgment on the pleadings, particularly where the plaintiff has not pursued the specific relief available under Rules 59 or 60.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Faris should be granted leave under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) to amend his complaint more than four years after filing and after the court had granted judgment on the pleadings on his remaining claims.
2. Whether the proposed amendment was futile because the existing and proposed claims could not withstand dismissal, including because of federal preemption.
3. Whether undue delay and resulting prejudice supported denial of leave to amend.

Disposition

other