Adobe Systems Incorporated v. A & S Electronics, Inc. et al

Filing 73

ORDER by Judge Armstrong denying 72 Stipulation to File Third Amended Complaint and to Continue Pre-Trial and Trial Dates. (sbalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/22/2016)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6

OAKLAND DIVISION

7

ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED, a

Case No: C 12-00790 SBA

8 Delaware Corporation,

Plaintiff,

9
10

vs.

11 A & S ELECTRONICS, INC., a California

ORDER DENYING STIPULATION
TO FILE THIRD AMENDED
COMPLAINT AND TO CONTINUE
PRE-TRIAL AND TRIAL DATES
Dkt. 72

Corporation d/b/a TRUSTPRICE; ALAN Z.
12 LIN, an Individual; and DOES 1-10,
Inclusive,
13

Defendants.
14
15
16

On May 21, 2015, Plaintiff Adobe Systems Inc. (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action

17

against A & S Electronics, Inc. (“A&S”), and its owner, Alan Z. Lin (“Lin”), for trademark

18

and copyright infringement, among other claims. The parties are now before the Court on

19

the parties’ Stipulation to File Third Amended Complaint and to Continue Pre-Trial and

20

Trial Dates. Plaintiff avers that during the course of discovery, it discovered facts that

21

A&S and/or Lin obtained various products from other companies that infringe its trademark

22

and copyrights. Dkt. 72 at 2. As such, Plaintiff seeks to join the following eleven

23

additional party-defendants: ABB Liquidating & Trading; Action Tech; Atlantic Media

24

Sales, LLC; Budget Computer; Computechsale, LLC; Expresscomm International, Inc.;

25

Fairtrade Corporation; FCO Electronic; ITR Consulting Group; Reliable Business Partner,

26

Inc.; and Lester Wiegers d/b/a Ultraelectronics (collectively, “Additional Defendants”).

27

The parties also seek to enlarge all upcoming pretrial deadlines and the trial date by

28

approximately three months.

1

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 provides that deadlines established in a case

2

management order may “be modified only for good cause[.]” Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4).

3

“Good cause” exists when a deadline “cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the

4

party seeking the extension.” Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609

5

(9th Cir. 1992) (citation omitted). Here, the deadline to amend the pleadings and join

6

additional parties was January 12, 2016. The parties make no effort to demonstrate good

7

cause for failing to amend the pleadings on or before that date. Moreover, the parties fail to

8

make any showing that the joinder of eleven new parties is either necessary or appropriate

9

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20. See Desert Empire Bank v. Ins. Co. of N. Am.,

10

623 F.2d 1371, 1374 (9th Cir. 1980) (noting that both Rule 15 and Rule 20 standards are

11

implicated by a motion to amend pleadings to add a new party). Accordingly,

12
13
14
15

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Stipulation to File Third Amended
Complaint and to Continue Pre-Trial and Trial Dates is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 4/22/16

______________________________
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG
Senior United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-