Innovative Automation LLC v. Mediaytechnics Systems, Inc et al

Filing 17

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd (1) Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint; and (2) Denying as Moot Plaintiff's Motion to Strike. (hrllc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/1/2011)

1
2

*E-FILED 11-01-2011*

3
4
5
6
NOT FOR CITATION

8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

7

No. C11-03410 HRL

INNOVATIVE AUTOMATION, LLC,

12

Plaintiff,
v.

13
14

MEDIATECHNICS SYSTEMS, INC.; TIBI
SZILAGYA; and COPTECH DIGITAL, INC.,

15

ORDER (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST
AMENDED COMPLAINT; AND (2)
DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO STRIKE
[Re: Docket No. 14]

Defendants.
/

16
17

Plaintiff Innovative Automation, LLC (Innovative Automation) sues for alleged

18

infringement of United States Patent No. 7,174,362. According to plaintiff, the patent-in-suit

19

describes and claims a computer-implemented method of digital data duplication.

20

Now before the court is Innovative Automation’s motion for leave to file a first amended

21

complaint adding several new defendants.1 The court has received no opposition to the motion.

22

Upon consideration of the moving papers, as well as the discussion held at the hearing,

23

plaintiff’s motion to amend is granted.

24

Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs motions for leave to amend

25

and provides that “[t]he court should freely give leave when justice so requires.” FED. R. CIV.

26

P. 15(a)(2). The decision whether to grant leave to amend under Rule 15(a) is committed to the

27
28

At the motion hearing, plaintiff (1) advised that it has reached a settlement
with defendant Coptech Digital, Inc. and (2) withdrew its motion to strike the “Answer to
Complaint” filed by Coptech’s President, Thomas E. Cherry. Plaintiff’s motion to strike
therefore is denied as moot.
1

1

sound discretion of the trial court. See Waits v. Weller, 653 F.2d 1288, 1290 (9th Cir. 1981).

2

Leave need not be granted, however, where the amendment would cause the opposing party

3

undue prejudice, is sought in bad faith, constitutes an exercise in futility, or creates undue delay.

4

Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). “Absent prejudice, or a strong showing of any of

5

the remaining Foman factors, there exists a presumption under Rule 15(a) in favor of granting

6

leave to amend.” Eminence Capital LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1052 (9th Cir. 2003).

7

Here, plaintiff seeks to add three new defendants: Richard Wilson, Vinpower, Inc., and

8

Vinpower Digital, Inc. Innovative Automation believes that Wilson is at least partially

9

responsible for the sale of the accused devices of defendant Mediatechnics Systems, Inc.
(Mediatechnics). Vinpower, Inc., and Vinpower Digital, Inc. allegedly manufacture the same

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

accused Mediatechnics machines. Based on representations that these three proposed

12

defendants make, offer to sell, and sell the same accused product, see 35 U.S.C. § 299, and

13

given the relatively early stage of this litigation, the court concludes that the requested

14

amendment should be permitted. Plaintiff shall promptly file its proposed First Amended

15

Complaint as a separate docket entry.

16
17

SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 1, 2011

18
HOWARD R. LLOYD
19

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

1

5:11-cv-03410-HRL Notice has been electronically mailed to:

2

Adam Gutride

3

Seth Adam Safier

4

Todd Michael Kennedy

5

Victoria L.H. Booke

6

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not
registered for e-filing under the court’s CM/ECF program.

[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

[e-mail], [e-mail]

7
8

5:11-cv-03410-HRL Notice sent by U.S. Mail to:

9

Thomas E. Cherry, President
Coptech Digital, Inc.
100 Cummings Park
Woburn, MA 01801

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3