Trove Brands, LLC v. TRRS Magnate LLC

Summary

The court grants in part and denies in part Defendants’ motion to amend the scheduling order and for leave to file an amended answer. Defendants may file an amended answer limited to withdrawing, correcting, and clarifying existing claims and defenses, but may not add new defenses or counterclaims. The court denies an extension of the discovery deadline and denies several related motions as moot.

Holdings

1. Defendants did not establish good cause to modify the scheduling order and extend discovery because the discovery period had already been extended by 60 days and Defendants did not adequately justify the need for another extension.
2. Defendants were entitled to limited leave to file an amended answer because they demonstrated sufficient diligence under Rule 16, but the proposed amendment could not add new defenses or counterclaims because doing so would cause undue delay and significant prejudice to Plaintiff.
3. Because the amended answer would supersede the operative answer, Plaintiff's motion to dismiss the counterclaims and strike affirmative defenses, Defendants' motion for reconsideration concerning the struck amended answer, and Defendants' prior motion to amend were moot.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Defendants demonstrated good cause under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4) to modify the scheduling order and extend the discovery deadline.
2. Whether Defendants should receive leave under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) to file an amended answer.
3. If leave to amend was appropriate, whether the proposed amendments could add new defenses or counterclaims at that stage of the litigation.

Disposition

other