PhoneDog, LLC v. Kravitz
Filing
46
MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Answer and Counterclaims filed by Noah Kravitz. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Proposed Order)(Keane, Margaret) (Filed on 4/30/2012)
1
2
3
4
MARGARET A. KEANE (State Bar No. 255378)
mkeane@dl.com
DEWEY & LEBOEUF LLP
Post Montgomery Center
One Montgomery Street, Suite 3500
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 951-1100
Facsimile: (415) 951-1180
5
6
7
8
Cary Kletter (State Bar No. 210230)
Sally Trung Nguyen (State Bar No. 267275)
ckletter@kletterlaw.com
KLETTER LAW FIRM
1900 S. Norfolk Street, Suite 350
San Mateo, CA 94403
Telephone: (415) 434-3400
9
Attorneys for Defendant Noah Kravitz
10
11
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
PHONEDOG, LLC, a Delaware corporation,
14
Plaintiff,
v.
15
NOAH KRAVITZ, an individual,
16
Defendant.
17
18
19
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 3:11-cv-03474 (MEJ)
DEFENDANT NOAH KRAVITZ’S
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST
AMENDED ANSWER AND
COUNTERCLAIMS
Date: Thursday, June 7, 2012
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Courtroom: B, 15th Floor
Judge: Hon. Maria-Elena James
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED ANSWER
Case No. 3:11-cv-03474 (MEJ)
1
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION
2
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
3
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on Thursday, June 7, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. or as soon
4
thereafter as this matter may be heard in Courtroom B – 15th Floor of the above-referenced Court,
5
located at 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California, before the Honorable Maria-Elena
6
James, Defendant Noah Kravitz (“Kravitz”), by and through undersigned counsel, will, and hereby
7
does move this Court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) for leave to file a First
8
Amended Answer and Counterclaims. This motion is based on the accompanying Memorandum of
9
Points and Authorities, Kravitz’s First Amended Answer and Counterclaims (Exhibit A), and the
10
Proposed Order filed herewith. The motion is further based on all of the files and records of this
11
action and on any additional material that may be elicited at the hearing of this motion.
12
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
13
INTRODUCTION
14
Pursuant to the Court’s Case Management Order entered on October 21, 2011, the deadline
15
for parties to file amended pleadings is April 30, 2012. Kravitz files this Motion and the proposed
16
amended pleading within that deadline. As set forth in the proposed First Amended Answer and
17
Counterclaims attached hereto as Exhibit A, Kravitz alleges in the Sixth Counterclaim that Plaintiff’s
18
attempt to impose and/or enforce a covenant not to compete in violation of California Business &
19
Professions Code § 16600 et seq. constitutes unfair, fraudulent, and unlawful conduct in violation of
20
California Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq.
21
Specifically, Kravitz alleges that PhoneDog expressly consented to Kravitz’s changing the
22
Twitter handle on the Twitter Account at issue and to Kravitz’s ongoing use of the Account under
23
the new handle @noahkravitz. After Kravitz resigned from PhoneDog and began a full-time
24
position at TechnoBuffalo, a company that offers some services competing with those of PhoneDog,
25
PhoneDog represented to Kravitz that it did not consent to Kravitz publishing mobile content while
26
he was receiving compensation from PhoneDog, claiming that such action was barred by non-
27
compete protocol, though the parties had no such agreement. PhoneDog subsequently cancelled a
28
check for amounts due to Kravitz under the Commission Agreement and sued Kravitz for ownership
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED ANSWER
1
Case No. 3:11-cv-03474 (MEJ)
1
of the Twitter handle. As a result of such conduct, Kravitz alleges that PhoneDog has violated
2
California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq. and that Kravitz has lost money in the
3
form of commissions forfeited based on the alleged violation of the aforementioned covenant not to
4
compete, as well as substantial legal fees expended when he was forced to initial legal action to
5
recover the funds due to him (which he has not recovered to date) and was forced to defend this
6
action.
7
ARGUMENT
8
9
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) provides that leave to amend a pleading “shall freely
[be] give[n] … when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Leave to amend is “to be applied
10
with extreme liberality.” Owens v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan, Inc., 244 F.3d 708, 712 (9th Cir.
11
2001) (citation omitted). None of the factors relied upon by the courts in denying a motion for leave
12
to amend a pleading, “bad faith, undue delay, prejudice to the opposing party, and/or futility,” are
13
present here. Griggs v. Pace Am. Group, Inc., 170 F.3d 877, 880 (9th Cir. 1990).
14
The amended counterclaim asserted are made in good faith and within the time permitted by
15
the Court. Plaintiff will have the chance to answer the amended counterclaim and thus will not be
16
prejudiced. Finally, Plaintiff cannot show that the amended counterclaim is certain to result in
17
summary judgment in Plaintiff’s favor, and therefore cannot make the requisite showing that the
18
amendment is futile. See DCD Programs, Ltd. v. Leighton, 833 F.2d 183, 186 (9th Cir. 1987).
19
Allowing an amendment would be in the interests of justice. Defendant’s counsel from
20
Dewey & LeBoeuf had very little time to answer Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint due to the
21
mediation that was scheduled almost immediately after Dewey & LeBoeuf’s first appearance in this
22
case. While the parties have engaged and are continuing to engage in extensive settlement
23
discussions, Defendant files this Motion to preserve his right to assert all viable counterclaims
24
against Plaintiff.
25
26
///
27
///
28
///
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED ANSWER
2
Case No. 3:11-cv-03474 (MEJ)
1
2
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Kravitz respectfully requests that the Court grant this Motion for
3
Leave to Amend and allow for entry of the First Amended Answer and Counterclaims attached
4
hereto as Exhibit A.
5
6
DATED: April 30, 2012
7
By:
/s/ Margaret A. Keane
10
MARGARET A. KEANE (SBN 255378)
mkeane@dl.com
Post Montgomery Center
One Montgomery Street, Suite 3500
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 951-1100
Facsimile: (415) 951-1180
11
and
12
Cary Kletter (State Bar No. 210230)
Sally Trung Nguyen (State Bar No. 267275)
ckletter@kletterlaw.com
KLETTER LAW FIRM
1900 S. Norfolk Street, Suite 350
San Mateo, CA 94403
Telephone: (415) 434-3400
8
9
13
14
15
16
Attorney for Defendant Noah Kravitz
17
US1 32404083.1
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED ANSWER
3
Case No. 3:11-cv-03474 (MEJ)
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?