ROYAL APPLIANCE MANUFACTURING CO. v. FELLOWES, INC., 1:10-CV-2604. (2013)
Court: District Court, N.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20130828d00
Visitors: 8
Filed: Aug. 27, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 27, 2013
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DONALD C. NUGENT, District Judge. This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Amend Final Invalidity Contentions. Plaintiffs seek leave to amend the invalidity contentions asserted against U.S. Patent No. 8,020,796, upon which certain of Defendant's counterclaims are based. (ECF #86, 92). Defendant opposes the request amendment as untimely. (ECF #90). The counterclaims addressing the `796 Patent were last amended in April of 2013. (ECF #80-4)
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DONALD C. NUGENT, District Judge. This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Amend Final Invalidity Contentions. Plaintiffs seek leave to amend the invalidity contentions asserted against U.S. Patent No. 8,020,796, upon which certain of Defendant's counterclaims are based. (ECF #86, 92). Defendant opposes the request amendment as untimely. (ECF #90). The counterclaims addressing the `796 Patent were last amended in April of 2013. (ECF #80-4)...
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
DONALD C. NUGENT, District Judge.
This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Amend Final Invalidity Contentions. Plaintiffs seek leave to amend the invalidity contentions asserted against U.S. Patent No. 8,020,796, upon which certain of Defendant's counterclaims are based. (ECF #86, 92). Defendant opposes the request amendment as untimely. (ECF #90). The counterclaims addressing the `796 Patent were last amended in April of 2013. (ECF #80-4). Based on all of information set forth in the parties' briefs, the Court finds that allowing the requested amendment would not prejudice the Defendant, and, taking into account all of the facts and circumstances, granting leave to amend would best serve the ends of justice. Therefore, Plaintiffs' motion is hereby GRANTED. There shall, however, be no further leave given for amendments to the Invalidity Contentions. IT IS
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
