Ward v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al

Filing 120

MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Answer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint and Counterclaim by Cisco Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Order)(Babcock, Charles)

Download PDF
Ward v. Cisco Systems, Inc. et al Doc. 120 Case 4:08-cv-04022-JLH Document 120 Filed 10/19/09 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION JOHN WARD, JR. v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC AND RICK FRENKEL CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND COUNTERCLAIM TO THE HONORABLE COURT: Pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant, Cisco Systems, Inc. ("Cisco") respectfully moves this Court for entry of an Order granting it leave to file Cisco's First Amended Answer to Plaintiff s First Amended Complaint and Counterclaim, attached hereto as Exhibit A. In support of this motion, Cisco states as follows: 1. Cisco seeks leave to file an amended answer to clarify its contention that Texas C.A. NO. 08-4022 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED substantive law governs Plaintiff s claims, to affirmatively assert that neither the tort of outrage nor false light invasion of privacy are recognized by the State of Texas, and to set out the legal standard which must be met to attribute an employee's actual malice to an employer, along with clarifications of a few answers to Plaintiff s contentions. 2. A Court should grant leave to file an amended pleading absent a showing of prejudice, bad faith or undue delay. Fornan v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). Leave to amend should be freely given when justice so requires. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). There has been no showing of prejudice, had faith or undue delay here, and therefore the Court should grant leave to file the amended pleading. 1 5634861v.1 132824/00001 Dockets.Justia.com Case 4:08-cv-04022-JLH Document 120 Filed 10/19/09 Page 2 of 3 Cisco's motion is filed within the time period allowed for amending pleadings in the Court's Scheduling Order and therefore will cause no delay. 4. The amendment will not prejudice Plaintiff, is not brought in bad faith, and will not cause undue delay. The very facts set out in Plaintiff's amended complaint confirm Texas' significant relationship to the parties and the issues, including Plaintiff s residency, that he practices law in Texas, and that the events described in the allegedly defamatory articles took place in Texas. 5. This motion is being sought for a proper purpose, the defenses and other legal contentions asserted in the amended pleading are warranted by existing law or by a non-frivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or establishing new law, and the factual contentions and denials have evidentiary support. WHEREFORE, Cisco Systems, Inc. respectfully requests that the Court enter an order granting it leave to file its First Amended Answer to Plaintiff s First Amended Complaint and Counterclaim. 2 5634861v 1 132824/00001 Case 4:08-cv-04022-JLH Document 120 Filed 10/19/09 Page 3 of 3 Jackson Walker L.L.P. By: Al Charles L. Babcock Richard E. Griffin Arkansas Bar No.: 63020 Email: rgriffin@jw.com Charles L. Babcock Federal Bar No.: 10982 Email: cbabcockajw.com Crystal J. Parker Federal Bar No.: 621142 Email: cparker@jw.com 1401 McKinney Suite 1900 Houston, Texas 77010 (713) 752-4200 (713) 752-4221 -- Fax ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that on this 19 th day of October, 2009, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Cisco Systems, Inc.'s Original Answer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint was served electronically, upon: Patricia L. Peden Law Offices of Patricia L. Peden 5901 Christie Avenue Suite 201 Emeryville, CA 94608 Attorney for Plaintiff John Ward, Jr. Nicholas H. Patton Patton, Tidwell & Schroeder, LLP 4605 Texas Boulevard P.O. Box 5398 Texarkana, Texas 75505-5398 Attorney for John Ward, Jr. is/ Charles L. Babcock Charles L. Babcock 3 5634861v 132824/00001

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?