Intellectual Property Law

Judge Robinson: Teva?s Late Motion for Leave to Amend Pleading DENIED

By Karen E. Keller, Andrew A. Lundgren et al.

On February 25th, 2011, in OSI Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Civ. No. 09-185-SLR (Consol.) (D. Del. Feb. 25, 2011), Judge Robinson issued a memorandum order denying Defendants? motion for leave to amend their pleadings. While the court?s scheduling order set January 29, 2010 as the deadline to amend pleadings, id. at 1, Defendants filed their motion to amend on October 25, 2010 ? almost nine months after the deadline, id. at 2. Defendants argued that ?good cause? existed for their late motion, citing the volume of documents produced by Plaintiffs, the specificity required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b), and the ?protracted discovery proceedings.? Id. Judge Robinson disagreed, noting that (1) the documents at issue had been available ?well before October 2010[,]? (2) there were no citations to the depositions held in August 2010 in Defendants? opening brief, and (3) Defendants had changed their legal argument in their letter submission. Id. at 2-3. While noting Rule 15(a)(2)?s provision that courts should ?freely give leave [to amend pleadings] when justice so requires[,]? id. at 1, Judge Robinson concluded that ?justice [did] not require leave to amend in this instance.? Id. at 3.

OSI Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Civ. No. 09-185-SLR (Consol.) (D. Del. Feb. 25...

Full post as published by Delaware IP Law Blog on March 10, 2011 (boomark / email).