Judge Gary Allen Feess of the Central District in Los Angeles agreed with plaintiffs in Am. Inst. of Intradermal Cosmetics, Inc. v. Soc’y of Permanent Cosmetic Professionals, No. CV 12-06887 GAF (JCx), 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160395 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2014), and permitted filing of a Third Amended Complaint in an antitrust lawsuit.  The new pleading asserted fact allegations of disparagement nested within Sherman Act claims in order to facilitate securing insurance coverage benefits for the ongoing settlement negotiations with the defendant’s insurers.

Judge Feess found it noteworthy that it was only upon the receipt of the specific insurance policies “that Plaintiff could assess, with retained insurance coverage counsel, how to proceed with additional claims that would trigger coverage.”

The re-crafted amended complaints simply clarified fact allegations that evidenced insurance under multiple policy periods, as the court stated, id. at *9:

[B]ecause the Lanham Act Plaintiff now seeks to add has a similar substantive and factual basis and is essentially seeking the same relief as Plaintiff’s existing Sherman Act claim, Defendants are not likely to suffer prejudice if amendment is allowed.

Gauntlett & Associates served as coverage counsel for the plaintiffs.