Case 2:25-cv-00978-APG-BNW Document 105 Filed 10/14/25 Page 24 of 27
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
applicable statute of limitations,” but the defendant attached a memorandum of points and authorities that mentioned the specific statutory section on which the defendant relied. Wyshak v. City Nat. Bank , 607 F.2d 824, 827 (9th Cir. 1979); see also Kohler , 779 F.3d at 1019 (declining to “disturb the district court’s finding” that an answer gave fair notice of a defense that the store gave “substantially equivalent” access to the disabled plaintiff where the answer stated that the defendant complied with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by having “alternate methods of accessibility” even though alternative methods of accessibility “stem[s] from a distinct portion of the ADA apart from the equivalent facilitation” (quotation omitted)). Here, the defendants’ answer gives no hint as to how either doctrine would apply to Crypto. Although the defendants need not give a detailed statement of facts to support their invocation of these defenses, they must at least give fair notice of the grounds for them. Because they have not done so, I strike the judicial and collateral estoppel defenses. But I grant the defendants leave to amend. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) (stating that “[t]he court should freely give leave [to amend] when justice so requires”).
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
E. I strike the unclean hands affirmative defense because the answer does not give fair notice of the grounds for it.
The defendants’ eighth affirmative defense is that Crypto’s claims are barred by the unclean hands doctrine. ECF No. 38 at 16. Crypto argues that this defense does not give fair notice of the grounds for asserting it. And it contends that even if the defense was adequately pleaded, the doctrine should not apply because enjoining the defendants from prosecuting Crypto serves the public interest where state law is preempted. The defendants respond that whether Crypto’s alleged unclean hands prevents it from obtaining injunctive relief is a disputed question that cannot be resolved through a motion to strike.
24
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs