Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:15-CV-156-DJH-CHL
08-12-2015
SYNERGY TOOL & GAUGE, LLC, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. MARTINREA TECH TOOL & DIE, INC., Defendant/Counter-Claimant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on a motion filed by Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Synergy Tool & Gauge, LLC ("Synergy") seeking leave to amend its complaint and add two entities as plaintiffs ("Motion to Amend"). (DN 12.) Martinrea did not file a response. This matter is now ripe for review. For the following reasons, the Motion to Amend (DN 12) is GRANTED.
Background
Synergy originally filed its complaint ("Existing Complaint") in this case on January 7, 2015 in Nelson Circuit Court. (DN 1-2.) On February 18, 2015, Martinrea removed the action to this Court. (DN 1.) In response to the Existing Complaint, Martinrea filed an answer and counterclaim against Synergy. (DN 4.) Synergy answered the counterclaim and, on the same day, filed its Motion to Amend. (DN 11, 12.) In the Motion to Amend, Synergy requests that the Court permit it to file an amended complaint that would add two entities as plaintiffs in this case. Synergy asserts that through "inadvertent error," it filed the Existing Complaint in only its own name but that two other entities, Faisionia Plantation, Inc. ("Faisionia") and S.A.B. Enterprises, Inc. ("S.A.B.") should have been included as plaintiffs. (DN 12 at 1.) Synergy states that it has assigned to Faisionia and S.A.B. some or all of its rights to the claims asserted in the Existing Complaint, and that Faisionia and S.A.B. join Synergy in the filing of the Motion to Amend. (Id.) Synergy attached to the Motion to Amend a proposed amended complaint ("Proposed Amended Complaint"). (DN 12-1.)
Discussion
Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs the amendment of pleadings. A party may amend a pleading once as a matter of course within 21 days of serving it, or, "if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(A)-(B). After the time in which one may amend a pleading as a matter of course has passed, "a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave. Id. at (a)(2). The Court "should freely give leave when justice so requires." Id.
Martinrea filed an answer to the Existing Complaint on February 18, 2015. The last date on which Synergy could amend the Existing Complaint as a matter of right was 21 days after the filing of the last responsive pleading, or March 11, 2015. Synergy filed the Motion to Amend on March 16, 2015. Therefore, Synergy may not amend the Existing Complaint as a matter of course. As Martinrea did not give written consent to amendment of the Existing Complaint, it is the Court's task to grant leave to amend if justice so requires. Fed. R. Civ. P. (a)(2).
The Court finds that justice requires it to permit Synergy to file an amended complaint adding Faisionia and S.A.B. as plaintiffs. The Proposed Amended Complaint (DN 12-1) is nearly identical to the Existing Complaint and would not add any claims against Martinrea. (Compare DN 1-2 with DN 12-1.) While Synergy and Martinrea have filed an agreed litigation plan (DN 17) and initial disclosures pursuant to Rule 26(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (DN 22, 23), the Court has not yet conducted a scheduling conference or set any case management deadlines in this case. Finally, the fact that Martinrea did not file a response to the Motion to Amend, even after being granted additional time to do so (see DN 14), suggests that Martinrea does not oppose the Motion to Amend. See LR 7.1(c) (providing that failure to timely respond to a motion may be grounds, in itself, for granting the motion).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
(1) Synergy's Motion to Amend (DN 12) is hereby GRANTED.
(2) The Proposed Amended Complaint (DN 12-1) is DEEMED FILED.
(3) Faisionia Plantation, Inc. and S.A.B. Enterprises, Inc. are hereby ADDED AS PLAINTIFFS to this action.
(4) The undersigned Magistrate Judge will conduct a telephonic status conference in this case on September 17, 2015 at 9:30 a.m. Counsel shall be prepared to discuss the procedural posture of the litigation, case management deadlines, and any other matters that counsel believe should be brought to the Court's attention. The call will be initiated by the Court. Counsel for each party shall contact the Magistrate Judge's Case Manager, Theresa Burch at theresa_burch@kywd.uscourts.gov no later than September 14, 2015 to provide the name of the attorney(s) who will participate in the status conference and the telephone number at which counsel may be reached. August 12, 2015
/s/
Colin Lindsay, Magistrate Judge
United States District Court
cc: Counsel of record