Limited Amendments Of Infringement Contentions During Discovery Are Consistent With The Federal Discovery Rules
Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.21.06
In 02 Micro International Ltd. v. Monolithic Power Systems, Inc., (No. 06-1064; November 15, 2006), the Federal Circuit affirms the district court's denial of leave to amend infringement contentions and supplementation of an expert report. Local rules require parties to state infringement contentions early in the litigation, with the ability to amend the contentions to account for the district court's claim construction. All other amendments to infringement contentions are allowed only for good cause which requires a showing of diligence.
The Federal Circuit holds that the requirement of the local rules to amend contentions with diligence after discovery of new information is consistent with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by balancing the right to develop new information in discovery with the need for certainty of legal theories. As 02 Micro did not provide sufficient evidence that it acted with diligence during the three month delay between discovery of new information and amendment of the infringement contentions, the Federal Circuit holds that the district court's denial of leave to amend infringement contentions was not unreasonable or arbitrary.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.03.26
Important EU Court Judgment Clarifies Rules on Interest Due in Cartel Damages Cases
In a judgment that will have direct and immediate consequences, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has clarified that for all competition damages actions brought after 26 December 2014, interest runs from the date on which the harm occurred. The ruling addressed two important questions: (1) whether national provisions implementing Article 3(2) of the EU Damages Directive — which requires interest to run from the date harm occurred —apply to cases in which the harm preceded the adoption of those provisions; and (2) how the date of harm should be determined in cartel cases involving the purchase of goods at inflated prices.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.02.26
SBA OHA Confirms That the Submission Date for a Proposal with Pricing Controls Size Determination
Client Alert | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
