Durst Phototechnik AG v. Imaging Technology International Corporation

Filing 43

ORDER granting 41 Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs Amended Complaint [Docket No. 41 -2] is accepted for filing as of the date of this Order. Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint on or before 10/05/2009, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 09/25/2009.(wjc, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 09-cv-00192-MSK-KLM DURST PHOTOTECHNIK AG, a foreign corporation, Plaintiff, v. IMAGING TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a Colorado corporation, Defendant. _____________________________________________________________________ ORDER _____________________________________________________________________ ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint [Docket No. 41; Filed September 24, 2009] (the "Motion"). Plaintiff seeks to add a new defendant, Bruce Morgan, to its fraud and misrepresentation claims. Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) provides for liberal amendment of pleadings. Leave to amend is discretionary with the court. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962); Viernow v. Euripides Devel. Corp., 157 F.3d 785, 799 (10th Cir. 1998). Amendment under the rule has been freely granted. Castleglenn, Inc. v. Resolution Trust Company, 984 F.2d 1571 (10th Cir. 1993) (internal citations omitted). "Refusing leave to amend is generally only justified upon a showing of undue delay, undue prejudice to the opposing party, bad faith or dilatory motive, failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, or futility of amendment." Frank v. U.S. West, Inc., 3 F.3d 1357, 1365 (10th Cir. 1993). Plaintiff has certified that Defendants do not oppose the Motion. The Court finds that there has been no showing of undue delay, prejudice, bad faith or dilatory motive.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint [Docket No. 41-2; Filed September 24, 2009] is accepted for filing as of the date of this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the Amended Complaint on or before October 5, 2009.

Dated: September 25, 2009

BY THE COURT: _ s/ Kristen L. Mix_________________ United States Magistrate Judge