In Kelly v. Hard Money Funding, Inc., 2004 UT App 44, 87 P.3d 734, the Utah Court of Appeals summarized the law regarding rule 15(a), as it has been interpreted by the Court. The court of appeals observed that the Court has generally focused on three factors in deciding whether a district court properly granted a motion for leave to amend: (1) timeliness; (2) prejudice; (3) justification. (Kelly, 87 P.3d 734, 2004 UT App 44). Explaining the first factor, the Kelly court noted that "motions to amend are typically untimely when they are filed in the advanced procedural stages of the litigation process." Id. The rationale for this factor is that "the ongoing passage of time makes it increasingly difficult for the nonmoving party to effectively respond to the new allegations." Id.