Antitrust claims permitted in MDL patent dispute
In Re: Rembrandt Technologies, LP Patent Litigation, MDL Docket No. 07-1848-GMS-LPS, June 29, 2009.
Stark, M.J. A motion to amend complaint filed by equipment vendors is granted. The Magistrate Judge further recommends that Rembrandt’s motion to strike or dismiss antitrust counter-counterclaims be denied as moot; and a motion for judgment on the pleadings relating to certain claims filed by the cable defendants be denied.
Plaintiffs timely seek leave to amend to add antitrust and unfair competition claims, claiming that Rembrandt has attempted to monopolize certain Data Over Cable Service Interface Specifications technology and equipment markets. Rembrandt contends that the amendment would be futile and runs counter to the purposes of MDL consolidation. The Magistrate Judge finds the motion to amend is timely and will not prejudice Rembrandt nor affect the trial date, nor has there been a showing that the amendment would be futile. The motion to dismiss the counter-counterclaims (asserted out of an abundance of caution) is mooted by the grant of the motion to amend. The Magistrate Judge recommends that the motion for judgment on the pleadings be denied because he agrees with the cable defendants that the factual allegations are sufficiently plead under notice pleading requirements, and notes Rembrandt’s arguments attack the merits of the claims rather than the sufficiency of the pleading.
