Guardant Health, Inc. v. Tempus AI, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Delaware grants Tempus AI, Inc.’s motion for leave to amend its answer and counterclaims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2). The court finds that Guardant Health did not establish undue prejudice, futility, delay, or bad faith, while directing the parties to submit a joint proposed amended scheduling order without changing the trial and related pretrial dates. Guardant’s pending motions to dismiss the counterclaims are denied as moot, and a scheduled telephonic hearing is cancelled.

Holdings

1. Leave to amend was granted because Guardant did not establish undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, undue prejudice, or futility.
2. An entirely new scheduling order was not warranted, but the parties were required to meet and confer and submit a joint proposed amended scheduling order while keeping the trial date, pretrial conference date, and associated pretrial-filing deadlines unchanged.
3. Guardant's motions to dismiss Tempus's counterclaims were denied as moot.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Tempus should be granted leave under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) to amend its answer and counterclaims.
2. Whether the proposed amendment would cause undue prejudice by requiring additional discovery or disrupting the existing case schedule.
3. Whether Guardant's pending motions to dismiss should be denied as moot after the amended answer and counterclaims are filed.

Disposition

other