Can Rule 15(c)(1) be used by original parties to defeat a timely claim?
<p>I am currently in a scenario analogous to this one:</p>

<p>Can this hypothetical sequence of events occur in the Federal Arena (particularly 9th cir).</p>

<p>1.) Plaintiff brings a suit against party A before limitations</p>

<p>2.) Party A files an answer</p>

<p>3.) Limitations expires</p>

<p>4.) Plaintiff files amended pleading, adding party B and argues that it should relate back under Rule 15(c)(1)</p>

<p>5.) Parties A and B respond with motions to dismiss, arguing that it does not relate back and thus limitations has expired with respect to both parties.</p>

<p>6.) Court agrees, entire action becomes time-barred against not only party B but also party A.</p>

<p>Generally, when you amend your pleading you ask for permission from the judge and are granted it, so if you filed within the time limit against party A, the court most likely would not say the time expired to file against party A. The rule even says "with leave to amend" so leave would be granted if you are talking about that rule.</p>

<p>Party B would have to ask that it be dismissed under the time rule and would win if the person who filed had no legal argument as to why they did not file in time. If the party who filed could show they couldn't have filed against party B in time, the judge might let it go forward, but it would probably be hard to say you could file against A in time, but not B.</p>

<p>It really just depends on the circumstances of why you didn't file against party B in time as to their part, but A wouldn't be excluded because you did file against A in time.</p>

united-states civil-procedure federal-courts