stated that motions to amend pleadings “shall be due on or before July 16, 2001.” On July 16, 2001, an attorney appearance was filed by new counsel for the plaintiff along with the plaintiffs motion for leave to file an amended complaint. Further, the defendant filed a motion to enlarge the time period for discovery in the case on November 27, 2001. The plaintiffs motion for leave to file an amended complaint is presently before the court. For the reasons that follow, the court will grant the plaintiffs motion. III. ANALYSIS A. Legal Standard for a Motion to Amend Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), leave to amend a complaint “shall be freely given when justice so requires.” See Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a); see also Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182, 83 S.Ct. 227, 9 L.Ed.2d 222 (1962) (<HOLDING>). A motion for leave to amend should not be
holding that absent a timely postjudgment motion the trial court has no jurisdiction to alter amend or vacate a final judgment holding that dismissal with leave to amend should be granted even if no request to amend was made holding that a plaintiff should be allowed to amend the complaint to add a claim holding that a plaintiff should be allowed to vacate a judgment and amend the complaint to proceed under a new legal theory holding that dismissal of a complaint for insufficient jurisdictional allegations should be without prejudice to amend