Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-01396/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-01396-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:0271 Patent Infringement

---

1

18-CV-1396-CAB-MDD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CRANDALL TECHNOLOGIES LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

GREATCALL INC.,

Defendant.

Case No.: 18-CV-1396-CAB-MDD

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND 

COMPLAINT

[Doc. No. 18] GREATCALL INC.,

Counter Claimant,

v.

CRANDALL TECHNOLOGIES LLC,

Counter Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a first amended 

complaint for patent infringement. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 states that courts 

“should freely give leave [to amend] when justice so requires.” “But a district court need 

not grant leave to amend where the amendment: (1) prejudices the other party; (2) is sought 

in bad faith; (3) produces an undue delay in litigation; or (4) is futile.” AmeriSourceBergen 

Corp. v. Dialysist W., Inc., 465 F.3d 946, 951 (9th Cir. 2006).

Case 3:18-cv-01396-CAB-MDD Document 20 Filed 03/01/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

18-CV-1396-CAB-MDD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Defendant opposes the motion, arguing that Plaintiff unduly delayed in seeking the 

amendment, that the amendment would be futile, and that it is sought in bad faith. For the 

most part, the Court is not persuaded. The primary purpose of the proposed amended 

complaint is to add a claim for willful infringement based on Defendant’s actions since this 

lawsuit was filed. Defendant argues that this claim is futile, but the gravamen of its 

argument goes to the merits of lawsuit as a whole, not whether the willful infringement 

claim would survive a motion to dismiss. Defendant implicitly acknowledges this fact in 

a footnote stating that it intends to file an early motion for summary judgment. Defendant 

is free to file such a motion, but its arguments about the lack of merit of Plaintiff’s lawsuit 

are misplaced with respect to Plaintiff’s desire to amend to add a willful infringement 

claim.

At the same time, the proposed amended complaint also includes a host of 

allegations about Defendant’s alleged conduct in this litigation that ostensibly support a 

claim for enhanced damages. The Court agrees with Defendant that these allegations are 

unnecessary and that they are irrelevant to any alleged willful infringement by Defendant. 

Accordingly, these allegations, appearing at paragraphs 196 through 205 of the proposed 

amended complaint [Doc. No. 18-2], should not be included in the amended complaint 

Plaintiff files pursuant to this order.

For the foregoing reasons, the motion for leave to file an amended complaint is 

GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff may file the first amended complaint attached to its 

motion, minus paragraphs 196 through 205. Plaintiff shall file this first amended complaint 

on or before March 6, 2019.

It is SO ORDERED. 

Dated: March 1, 2019

Case 3:18-cv-01396-CAB-MDD Document 20 Filed 03/01/19 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2