Free Order on Motion to Amend/Correct - District Court of California - California

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 261

Filed 02/29/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ELANTECH DEVICES CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. SYNAPTICS, INC., et al., Defendants. /

No. C 06-01839 CRB ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND FINAL INFRINGEMENT CONTENTIONS

Now pending before the Court is plaintiff's motion to amend its Final Infringement Contentions to add accused products that include Type 2 code. After reviewing the parties' submissions, the Court concludes that oral argument is unnecessary, see Local Rule 7-1(b), and GRANTS plaintiff's motion. Elantech has shown good cause for amending its contentions. First, Synaptics placed the products with type 2 code squarely at issue in this lawsuit by moving for summary judgment that products with type 2 code do not infringe the `352. The parties' vigorously contested the issue, and the Court carefully considered the question and concluded that products with Type II Code do infringe, although it denied Elantech's cross motion for summary judgment because it had not moved for partial summary judgment. Second, Synaptics does not dispute that it agreed not to oppose a motion by Elantech to amend its Final Infringement Contentions to include products including type 2 code should

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 261

Filed 02/29/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12

the Court deny Synaptics' motion for summary judgment of noninfringement as to type 2 code. Third, while Elantech should have filed its motion to amend shortly after the Court issued its summary judgment ruling, and certainly before it filed its motion for summary judgment as to products containing type 2 code, Synaptics has not been prejudiced by this delay. Synaptics has known since it filed its own motion and agreed not to oppose an amendment that the type 2 code, and thus products including type 2 code, are at issue in this lawsuit. In contrast to the lack of prejudice to Synaptics, denying the proposed amendment will prejudice the administration of justice. Such a ruling would merely force Elantech to file a new lawsuit to address an issue this Court has already decided in this lawsuit. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 29, 2008

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 G:\CRBALL\2006\1839\orderreamendfinalic.wpd2

CHARLES R. BREYER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE