Piland, et al. v. Markwort Sporting Goods Company, et al.

Filing 33

ORDER signed by William H Orrick, III on 10/5/2017 GRANTING 26 Motion to Amend. Plaintiff shall e-file their First Amended Complaint within 10 days of the date of this order. (Donati, J)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 MARK PILAND and ANDREA PILAND, 6 Plaintiffs, 7 ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE v. 8 MARKWORT SPORTING GOODS COMPANY D/B/A GAME FACE, D/B/A GAMEFACE.COM, et al. 9 10 Re: Dkt. No. 27 Defendants. 11 United States District Court Eastern District of California Case No. 16-cv-01782-WHO 12 Plaintiffs seek leave to amend to add a claim for punitive damages against Defendant 13 14 Markwort and facts in support thereof. Dkt. No. 27.1 Plaintiffs argue that their ability to take 15 depositions of key third-party witnesses, and thereby uncover the facts they contend support a 16 claim for punitive damages against Markwort, was impeded by defendants’ unduly delayed 17 discovery responses. Dkt. Nos. 27, 32. Defendant Markwort opposes, arguing that plaintiffs have failed to show good cause for 18 19 leave to amend, as required under Rule 15 because the Rule 16 pretrial deadline for amending the 20 complaint has passed. Markwort contends that plaintiffs have not been diligent in both seeking 21 discovery and then in working with Markwort to narrow overbroad discovery requests. It asserts 22 that the recent depositions (where plaintiffs allegedly uncovered the facts supporting a claim for 23 punitive damages) were for individuals who were either disclosed back at the end of 2016 or 24 whose identify could readily have been determined from discovery responses produced in 2016. 25 Dkt. No. 31. Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to make the limited amendment they seek is GRANTED. It 26 27 28 1 The October 11, 2017 hearing on plaintiffs’ motion is VACATED. 1 appears that both sides bear responsibility for the slow pace of discovery in this case. Plaintiffs 2 moved promptly to amend following the conclusion of the relevant third-party depositions. There 3 is no prejudice to Markwort from allowing the amendment. Plaintiffs shall e-file their proposed 4 First Amended Complaint within ten (10) days of the date of this Order. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 5, 2017 7 8 William H. Orrick United States District Judge 9 10 United States District Court Eastern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?