Two Knights Defense, LLC v. United States ( 2023 )


Menu:
  •            In the United States Court of Federal Claims
    No. 22-1932
    (Filed: 14 February 2023)
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    ***************************************
    TWO KNIGHTS DEFENSE, LLC,               *
    *
    Plaintiff,            *
    *
    v.                                      *
    *
    THE UNITED STATES,                      *
    *
    Defendant,            *
    *
    and                                     *
    *
    FIVE STONES RESEARCH CORP.,             *
    *
    Defendant-Intervenor. *
    *
    ***************************************
    ORDER
    On 30 December 2022, plaintiff Two Knights Defense, LLC filed under seal its
    complaint in this post-award bid protest, ECF No. 1. Following the status conference held on 11
    January 2023, the Court entered a briefing schedule for forthcoming motions for judgment on the
    administrative record, ECF No. 15. On 23 January 2023, and in accordance with the scheduling
    order, the government served the administrative record to the parties through a file-sharing
    program and filed a notice of the filing of the administrative record, ECF No. 30. On 7 February
    2023, the government moved to correct the administrative record, ECF No. 31, which the Court
    granted on the same day. On 9 February 2023, plaintiff filed an amended complaint, ECF No.
    33. On 13 February 2023, the Court struck plaintiff’s amended complaint as deficient because
    plaintiff did not ask for leave to file the amended complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a)(2) of the
    Rules of the Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”), ECF No. 35. The same day, plaintiff filed an
    unopposed motion for leave to file an amended complaint (“Mot. to Amend Compl.”), ECF No.
    36.
    RCFC 15(a)(2) allows a party to amend “with opposing party’s written consent or the
    court’s leave.” The Court “should freely give leave when justice so requires.” RCFC 15(a)(2).
    When a party amends its complaint to include allegations it could not have made prior to
    examining the administrative record, the Court should grant leave. See Knowledge Connections,
    Inc. v. United States, 
    76 Fed. Cl. 6
    , 8 (2007) (citing Cedars-Sinai Medical Center v. Watkins, 
    11 F.3d 1573
    , 1582 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (noting the federal rules “are quite permissive in permitting a
    party to amend its complaint to conform to the evidence and to the positions taken at trial”))
    (granting leave to amend the complaint after the administrative record was filed). Plaintiff seeks
    to add three counts to the complaint based on the administrative record not available at the initial
    time of filing. See Mot. to Amend Compl. at 1–2. The government and intervenor do not oppose
    the amendment. Id. at 2. As plaintiff did not have access to the full administrative record prior
    to filing its initial complaint and the parties do not oppose the amendment, the Court grants leave
    to amend the complaint. See Knowledge Connections, Inc., 
    76 Fed. Cl. 6
     (citing Cedars-Sinai
    Medical Center, 
    11 F.3d at 1582
     (noting the federal rules “are quite permissive in permitting a
    party to amend its complaint to conform to the evidence and to the positions taken at trial”))
    (granting leave to amend the complaint after the administrative record was filed); RCFC
    15(a)(2).
    The Court accordingly GRANTS plaintiff’s motion for leave to file its amended
    complaint, ECF No. 36; plaintiff SHALL FILE its amended complaint by 17 February 2023.
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
    s/ Ryan T. Holte
    RYAN T. HOLTE
    Judge
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22-1932

Judges: Ryan T. Holte

Filed Date: 2/14/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 2/14/2023