Moli v. County of King

── Moli v. County of King ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Date: May 19, 2026 Category: General NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 19 2026 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FUAMATALA MOLI, No. 24-3155 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellant, 2:23-cv-00823-RSL v. MEMORANDUM* COUNTY OF KING; KING COUNTY METRO TRANSIT; JOHN AND JANE DOES, 1-10, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington Robert S. Lasnik, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted July 9, 2025 Submission Vacated July 15, 2025 Resubmitted May 19, 2026 Seattle, Washington Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges. Plaintiff-Appellant appeals the district court’s dismissal of her operative complaint with prejudice. “We may grant leave to amend in situations where the controlling precedents changed midway through the litigation.” Sonoma Cnty. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. Ass’n of Retired Emps. v. Sonoma County, 708 F.3d 1109, 1117–18 (9th Cir. 2013). And “[a]s a general rule, ‘[d]ismissal without leave to amend is improper unless it is clear, upon de novo review, that the complaint could not be saved by any amendment.’” Id. at 1118 (quoting Polich v. Burlington N., Inc., 942 F.2d 1467, 1472 (9th Cir. 1991)). In light of our decision in Detwiler v. Mid-Columbia Medical Center, 156 F.4th 886 (9th Cir. 2025), it is not clear that any deficiencies in Plaintiff-Appellant’s operative complaint could not be cured by amendment. Thus, we vacate and remand with instructions to grant Plaintiff-Appellant leave to amend her operative complaint. VACATED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. 2 24-3155