Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_22-cv-00018/USCOURTS-azd-2_22-cv-00018-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

TD Professional Services,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Truyo Incorporated, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CV-22-00018-PHX-MTL

ORDER 

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint. 

(Doc. 50). Defendants did not respond, and Plaintiff’s Motion does not indicate whether it 

sought Defendants’ consent to amend before filing this Motion. 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) provides that leave to amend should be freely 

granted “when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). “The power to grant leave to 

amend ... is entrusted to the discretion of the district court, which ‘determines the propriety 

of a motion to amend by ascertaining the presence of any of four factors: bad faith, undue 

delay, prejudice to the opposing party, and/or futility.’” Serra v. Lappin, 600 F.3d 1191, 

1200 (9th Cir. 2010) (quotation omitted).

Plaintiff seeks to amend its Complaint to conform it to the Court’s June 15, 2022 

Scheduling Order. (Doc. 50 at 2). Plaintiff seeks to: remove its aiding and abetting claim 

(Count III) that the Court previously dismissed at the June 15, 2022, case management 

conference after oral argument on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss; clarify its inducement 

allegations under 35 U.S.C. § 271; and make minor changes to the factual allegations for 

Case 2:22-cv-00018-MTL Document 59 Filed 08/09/22 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

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

clarity. (Id. at 2). 

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s proposed amendments and does not find that 

any of the relevant factors weigh against allowing the amendments.

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion (Doc. 50) is GRANTED, for the reasons 

stated herein.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s file and serve on Defendants a clean 

copy of their First Amended Complaint by Friday, August 12, 2022.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants respond to Plaintiff’s First 

Amended Complaint within the time limits prescribed in the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure.

Dated this 8th day of August, 2022.

Case 2:22-cv-00018-MTL Document 59 Filed 08/09/22 Page 2 of 2