Hyperion Entertainment C.V.B.A. v. Itec, LLC, 2:18-cv-00381

Cloanto Corporation sued Hyperion Entertainment for breach of contract, copyright infringement, and trademark infringement, based on intellectual property rights originally licensed in a 2009 settlement agreement between Hyperion and the "Amiga Parties."
Cloanto was not a signatory, assignee, or third-party beneficiary of the 2009 Settlement Agreement, but claimed standing via a "Successor/Acquirer Agreement Form" with Hyperion.
The district court dismissed Cloanto’s breach of contract and copyright infringement claims, holding that Cloanto lacked standing to sue under the Settlement Agreement.
Cloanto also sought to amend its pleadings to add C-A Acquisition—a newly created entity that received intellectual property from the Amiga Parties—but the district court denied this for lack of diligence and prejudice to Hyperion.
On appeal, the Ninth Circuit reviewed the district court’s standing determinations and denial of the motion to amend.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standing for breach of contract	Cloanto is a "successor/acquirer" bound by the Settlement and can sue	Cloanto is not a signatory or assignee	Cloanto lacks standing for breach of contract
Standing for copyright infringement	As copyright owner, Cloanto can sue regardless of Settlement	Non-aggression clause bars suit	Cloanto has standing under the Copyright Act
Motion to amend to add C-A Acquisition	Sought to add entity to cure standing issues	Delay and prejudice to Hyperion	Properly denied for lack of diligence/prejudice

Sprint Commc’ns Co., L.P. v. APCC Servs., Inc., 554 U.S. 269 (Assignees of a contract have standing to sue for breach of contract)
Righthaven LLC v. Hoehn, 716 F.3d 1166 (Copyright Act gives standing to legal owners of copyrights)
Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604 (Good cause required to amend scheduling orders; focus on diligence)