Legal Opinion
Buergofol GmbH v. Omega Liner Company, Inc.
District Court, D. South Dakota
Decided July 13, 2023No. 4:22-cv-04112Unknown
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION BUERGOFOL GMBH, 4:22-CV-04112-KES Plaintiff, vs. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL AND FOR ATTORNEYS’ OMEGA LINER COMPANY, INC., FEES Defendant. Plaintiff, Buergofol GmbH, alleges that defendant, Omega Liner Company, Inc., has infringed two of its patents. Docket 1. Omega moves to compel Buergofol to respond to Interrogatory Four and Request for Production Thirteen and for attorneys’ fees. Docket 62; Docket 63 at 15. Buergofol opposes both motions. Docket 68. For the following reasons, the court grants the motion to compel…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Gaylon Hofer v. Mack Trucks, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1993
- Shuffle Master, Inc. v. Progressive Games, Inc.District Court, D. Nevada · 1996
- Tate Access Floors, Inc. And Tate Access Floors Leasing, Inc. v. Interface Architectural Resources, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Verdegaal Brothers, Inc., William Verdegaal, George Verdegaal v. Union Oil Company of California, Brea Agricultural Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.