EPL Holdings, LLC v. Apple, Inc
Filing
53
ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 50 . Signed by District Judge Jon S. Tigar. (jstlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/31/2013)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
EPL HOLDINGS, LLC,
Case No. 12-cv-04306-JST
Plaintiff,
8
v.
ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST
AMENDED COMPLAINT
9
10
APPLE, INC,
Defendant.
Re: Dkt. No. 50
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
In this action for patent infringement, Plaintiff EPL Holdings moves under Federal Rule of
14
Civil Procedure 15(a) for leave to file a first amended complaint, which EPL has attached to its
15
motion as Exhibit A. As of the date of this Order, Defendant Apple has not opposed EPL’s
16
motion; the deadline for filing an opposition was March 22, 2013.
17
The proposed first amended complaint asserts new claims of infringement against Apple
18
based on two patents that the USPTO recently issued to EPL: U.S. Patent No. 8,384,720 (“the
19
‘720 patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 8,345,050 (“the ‘050 patent”). The ‘720 and ‘050 patents are
20
related to one of the patents that EPL asserted in the original complaint, namely U.S. Patent No.
21
7,683,903 (“the ‘903 patent”).
22
In support of its motion, EPL argues that the proposed amendment is timely because EPL
23
filed the motion before the deadline for moving for leave to amend the complaint, which the Court
24
set for March 8, 2013, in accordance with the parties’ stipulated case schedule. See Dkt. No. 48,
25
Stipulation to Modify Case Schedule; Dkt. No. 50, Order Granting Stipulated Request to Modify
26
Case Schedule. EPL also contends that the proposed amendment will not prejudice Apple because
27
the stipulated case schedule approved by the Court gives Apple additional time to comply with
28
Patent Local Rule 3-4. See id.
1
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) permits a party to amend a pleading once “as a
2
matter of course” within 21 days of serving it or within 21 days after a response to it has been
3
filed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). Otherwise, “a party may amend its pleading only with the
4
opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). A district court
5
“should freely give leave” to amend a pleading “when justice so requires.” Id. “Four factors are
6
commonly used to determine the propriety of a motion for leave to amend. These are: bad faith,
7
undue delay, prejudice to the opposing party, and futility of amendment.” DCD Programs, Ltd. v.
8
Leighton, 833 F.2d 183, 186 (9th Cir. 1987) (citation omitted). “The party opposing amendment
9
bears the burden of showing prejudice.” Id. at 187.
10
Here, permitting EPL to amend the complaint would be appropriate because there is no
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
evidence of bad faith, undue delay, prejudice to Apple, or futility of amendment. Moreover,
12
Apple does not oppose the filing of the proposed first amended complaint. Accordingly, EPL’s
13
motion is GRANTED. Within seven days of the date this Order is filed, EPL may file Exhibit A
14
as the first amended complaint.
15
IT IS SO ORDERED.
16
17
18
Dated: March 31, 2013
______________________________________
JON S. TIGAR
United States District Judge
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?