Free Reply Brief - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:06-cv-00036-SLR Document 61 Filed O4/18/2007 Page 1 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
MATTERN & ASSOCIATES, L.L.C., )
)
Plaintiff. )
) C.A. No. 1:06-CV—36 KA]
)
‘ v. )
)
)
· JOHN SEIDEL, )
)
Defendant and Third Party Plaintiff. )
)
)
v. )
)
)
·· ROBERT MATTERN, )
ABC ENTITIES 1-50, and )
J. Does l-50, )
)
Third Party Defendants. )
PLAINTIFF’S REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT
Y OF ITS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Mattem & Associates, LLC ("M&A"), files this Reply Memorandum of Law in
l Support of it Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint.
z Defendant John Seidel ("Seidel") offers no plausible rationale for a denial of M&A’s
i Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint. Although Seidel alleges in a conclusory fashion that
he will be prejudiced if an amendment is allowed, he does not demonstrate in any meaningful
way what that prejudice will be. No trial date has been set in the case and the amendment will
not therefore cause any delay in the resolution of the proceedings. Although Seidel claims that
the filing of the Amended Complaint will necessitate additional discovery, this is simply not the
58851 vl

l
Case 1 :06-cv-00036-SLR Document 61 Filed 04/18/2007 Page 2 of 4
case. The new claim which M&A seeks to assert, a claim for Misappropriation of Trade Secrets
arising under the Delaware Trade Secrets Act, arises Hom the same set of operative facts as its
previous causes of action, which were also based, in part, on Seidel"s removal and use of
Mattem’s confidential information. Moreover, all of the facts relevant to this claim, i.e. what
information Seidel rnisappropriated and how such information was used, are fully within Seidel’s
knowledge and therefore no additional discovery by Seidel is necessary.
Finally, Seidel’s position that M&A should be required to reimburse Seidel for any
additional deposition testimony is completely without merit. At the time Seidel took the
deposition of M&A’s principal, Rob Mattem, Seidel was already fully aware from the
allegations contained in the original Complaint that M&A claimed that Seidel had
misappropriated information from Seidel. Additional facts relevant to the issue of
misappropriation of confidential information came to light during Seidel’s deposition, which
took place before Seidel took Rob Mattern’s deposition. Therefore, Seidel had ample
opportunity to question M&A regarding its claim that Seidel had misappropriated information
nom M&A at the time Seidel took the deposition of M&A’s principal and there is no V
justification whatsoever for requiring M&A to bear any expense incurred in any further
discovery Seidel chooses to undertake.
For all of the foregoing reasons and the reasons set forth in its original Memorandum of
Law in Support of its Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint, Plaintiff Mattem &
q Associates, LLC respectfully requests that the court grant its Motion for Leave to Amend its
Complaint and accept Plaintgj"’s First Amended Complaint (attached to Plaintiffs Motion as
Exhibit "l”) for filing.
I
l
l 58851 vl 2

Case 1 :06-cv-00036-SLR Document 61 Filed 04/18/2007 Page 3 of 4
SEITZ, VAN OGTROP & GREEN, P.A.
` /s/ Kevin A. Guerke
By:
George H. Seitz, IH, ID #667
[email protected]
Kevin A. Guerke, ID #4096
[email protected]
222 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1500
P.O. Box 68
Wilmington, DE 19899
(302) 888-0600
.. and ..
Imogene E. Hughes, Esquire
Andrew Shapren, Esquire
Rubin, Fortunato & Harbison P.C.
10 S. Leopard Road
Paoli, PA 19301 ‘
Attorney for Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant.
DATED: April 18, 2007
58851 vl 3

Case 1 :06-cv-00036-SLR Document 61 Filed 04/18/2007 Page 4 of 4
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Kevin A. Guerke, Esquire, hereby certify that on this 18m day of April 2007, I
electronically Hled the foregoing Plczintyj"s Reply Memomnclum of Law in Support of Its Motion
for Leave to Amend the Complaint with the Clerk of Court using CM/ECE which will send
notification of such filing to counsel of record and also upon the following by first class mail to:
Paul A. Wemle, Jr., Esquire
Law Office of Paul A. Wernle
92 Read’s Way, Suite 106
New Castle Corporate Commons
New Castle, DE 19720
/s/ Kevin A. Guer/ce
Kevin A. Guerke (ID No. 4096)
kguerl<;e@,svglaw.corn
i
t
l
l
58853 vl
l .