Judge Hughes found the party to be necessary, and joinder feasible.
The issue here was the addition of a party the plaintiff claimed it wasn’t on notice was the proper defendant.
The plaintiff didn’t provide a reasonable justification for its delay, but the rest of the factors came out in its favor.
While the amended complaint was timely, Judge Albright found that it still should not be permitted. (In the sidecar was a discovery dispute, which, unlike the photo was not a good boi).
This motion to dismiss raised issues regarding claim splitting and improper venue which were novel, and issues regarding indirect and willful infringement which were not.
The court granted the motion, with leave for the defendant to amend its answer “again.”
The issue here was a defendant’s motion for leave to amend its answer to assert a license defense.
The defendant asked Judge Gilstrap to strike certain allegations it contended were unnecessary and to order the plaintiff to provide a more definite statement.
For some reason, documenting partial dismissals is not as simple as calling the other side up and saying “yeah, we’re dropping these claims/defenses”. Here’s a way it can be done.
This order combined Judge Gilstrap’s rulings on several procedural motions in a patent case addressed at a recent hearing.