Joint Appendix One

Case 2 10-cv-07678-JFW -DTB
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Document 64
Filed10/07/11 Page4of9 Page lD #:1215
Supplemental Responses to Nanoptix's first set of Interrogatories. Id. Y[8. The
Responses identified additional documents, including the Coca-Cola non-disclosure
Agreements and other information that FutureLogic apparently deemed relevant to
the on sale and public use bar issues, ld.
Both parties have exchanged hundreds of thousands of documents in
connection with the initial Complaint, Answer and Counterclaim, and fact and
expert depositions have been taken. Discovery cut-off is set for October 24, 2011
(Doe. # 26, last page). Due to the extensive amount of discovery that has already
occurred in connection with the proposed Amended Counterclaim and Defenses,
there is no need to extend the discovery deadline date or for either party to request
additional discovery.
A. Leave to Amend
I. ARGUMENT
Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4) provides that a scheduling order "may be modified
only for good cause and with the judge's consent." tn this action, "good cause"
exists to allow the scheduling order to be amended. The "good cause" standard set
by Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b)(4) primarily considers the diligence of the pm'ty seeking
the amendment, and the District Court may allow a post-deadline amendment if the
deadline could not reasonably have been met despite the diligence of the moving
party.
1992).
See Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir.
Nanoptix, Inc.'s Motion For Leave To File Amended Answer
with Incquitable Conduct Counterclaim and Defen_
-A0324-
4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I