Opinion ID: 209417
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Leave to amend Appellants' Complaint

Text: Finally, Appellants contend that the Court of Federal Claims erred by not permitting them to amend their Complaint to include claims for the extended period. From Appellants' papers, however, it is not clear to which extended period they are referring. Treating the proposed amendment as applying to the incentive loans, the Court of Federal Claims found that the Complaint was not reasonably susceptible [to] amendment to assert breach of contract claims with respect to the incentive equity loans, as such claims would appear to state separate and independent causes of action. Tamerlane III, 81 Fed.Cl. at 513 n. 1. The decision to grant or deny a motion for leave to amend ... lies within the sound discretion of the trial court. Insituform Techs., Inc. v. CAT Contracting, Inc., 385 F.3d 1360, 1372 (Fed.Cir. 2004). We find that there was no abuse of discretion by the Court of Federal Claims in denying leave to Appellants to introduce separate and independent causes of action. Accordingly, the Court of Federal Claims' denial of leave to amend is affirmed.