On April 30, 2010, defendants Muscletech Research and Development, Inc., Iovate Health Sciences U.S.A., Inc., Iovate Health Sciences Research, Inc., Iovate Health Sciences International, Inc. Iovate HC 2005 Formulations Ltd., and Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P. ("Defendants") filed a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), or in the alternative Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b).*fn1 On that same date, defendant GNC Corporation filed a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).*fn2 The hearing on both motions was set for July 2, 2010. On June 18, 2010 (in 10cv673) and June 21, 2010 (in 09md2087), attorneys for plaintiffs Deborah Rutherford, Dana Crawford, Michael Maggard, and Travis D. Horton ("Plaintiffs") filed a Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint.*fn3 On June 22, 2010, the Court ordered Defendants to file a response, if any, to Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend.*fn4 Pursuant to that order, Defendants filed a Response stating, "Defendants do not in principle oppose Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Amend and therefore do not have any objection to Plaintiffs filing an amended complaint at this time," but that Plaintiff's proposed amendments only cured some and not all of the pleading defects.*fn5
2. The scope of the leave granted is not limited to the amendments proposed by Plaintiffs, but shall be broad enough to permit Plaintiffs to make any and all amendments they deem appropriate or necessary to cure any defects alleged by Defendants.