Mata v. United States of America, No. SA:13-CV-220-DAE, slip op. (W.D. Tex. Jan. 3, 2014)(Ezra, J.)

Mata is an employee of a government contractor that stocks Coca-Cola products at Lakeland Air Force Base. She was hurt while stocking 12-packs at the Troop Mall and blamed the work of another government contractor for the incident. Slip op. at 2. Her suit against the government drew a motion to dismiss. Id. at 3. She did not respond to the motion until nearly two months after the deadline, but then moved for leave to respond (with the response attached) and moved for leave to amend her complaint. Id. The District Court concluded that the lawyer’s supposed confusion over the deadline did not amount to an extenuating circumstance, but that the other factors—length of delay, egregiousness of the failure, disruption of the docket, and prejudice—weighed in favor of leave. Id. at 4-6. Furthermore, the District Court allowed her to amend her complaint on many of the same considerations, along with the fact that the amended pleading addressed the government’s primary defense—that the responsible party was another independent contractor. Id. at 6-14.