WEINGAND v. HARLAND FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
MICHAEL WEINGAND, Plaintiff,
HARLAND FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS, INC., et al., Defendants.
No. C-11-3109 EMC.
United States District Court, N.D. California.
June 19, 2012.
Harland Financial Solutions, Inc., Defendant, represented by Abbey McLean Glenn, Morgan, Lewis and Bockius LLP, George Alan Stohner, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP & Jennifer P. Svanfeldt, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED ANSWER
EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.
Plaintiff Michael Weingand filed suit against Harland on June 23, 2011, alleging claims of, inter alia, wrongful termination and employment retaliation. On April 17, 2012, Defendant Harland Financial Solutions ("Harland") filed a motion for leave to file an Amended Answer, adding counterclaims for violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act ("CFAA"), 18 U.S.C. § 1030; California Penal Code § 502; conversion; breach of contract; unjust enrichment; negligent interference with prospective economic advantage; and California Business and Professions Code § 17200. Docket No. 30, Ex. 18.
After reviewing the parties' submissions, and for the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the motion.I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Harland's proposed counterclaims are based on Defendant's allegations that, after his employment with Harland as a Senior Field Engineer was terminated, Plaintiff "accessed, without authorization, over 2,700 business files belonging to Harland, its clients, and/or third-party software vendors some or all of which contained NPI [non-public information], copyrighted information, and/or confidential and propriety information." Am. Ans. ¶ 14. Defendant also alleges that Plaintiff accessed and copied Harland's licensed OnBase software, which it contends he now uses in his own business after he was terminated from Harland. Id. ¶¶ 18-19. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff thereby violated his obligation to "maintain the secrecy of Harland's confidential and proprietary information not only while employed by Harland but also after his employment ended." Am. Ans, ¶ 9.
The parties have engaged in discovery since June 2011. According to Defendant, it has been in the process of developing the basis for its counterclaims since October 2011. Most recently, Defendant informed the Court at the March 16, 2012 case management conference that it intended to assert counterclaims. The Court's minute order from that conference directed Defendant to obtain Plaintiff's stipulation or file a motion for leave to amend no later than April 17, 2012, the date on which Defendant filed the instant motion. See Docket No. 26. Defendant sought a stipulation from Plaintiff, which Plaintiff refused to provide. See Svanfeldt Decl., Docket No. 30, Ex. 17.