Summary
This order grants in part the plaintiffs' renewed motion for leave to amend their first amended verified complaint and motion for preliminary injunction. Applying the liberal standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, the court finds no undue delay, bad faith, or undue prejudice that would justify denying the amendment, and declines to rule on defendants' futility arguments at this stage. Consequently, the court orders the plaintiffs to file a second amended complaint by January 8, 2025, and denies the pending motions to dismiss and for preliminary injunction as moot.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the court should grant leave to amend the complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15.
- Whether the pending motion for preliminary injunction and the defendants’ motion to dismiss are moot.
Holdings
- The motion to amend is granted in part; plaintiffs may file a second amended complaint on or before January 8, 2025.
- Both motions are denied without prejudice as moot.
Key quotations
“Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule(s)”) provides that the Court “should freely give leave when justice so requires.” Id.” (2024 WL 3345334, at *1)
“Plaintiffs’ pending motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. 7) and Defendants’ pending motion to dismiss (Doc. 36) are each denied without prejudice as moot.” (2024 WL 3345334, at *1)
Factual background
Plaintiffs KMF Services, LLC and others sued Shift4 Payments, LLC. After filing an initial complaint, they filed a first amended complaint. They now move to file a second amended complaint, which defendants argue is futile and prejudicial.
Procedural history
Plaintiffs previously amended their pleading once as a matter of course. They now seek a second amendment. Defendants oppose on grounds of futility and alleged undue prejudice. The court addresses the motion under Rule 15.