Legal Opinion
Kleinerman v. Snitzer
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided October 15, 1990No. Civ. A. 90-40014-XXPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF REMAND AND PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR EXPEDITING REMAND
SKINNER, District Judge.
On March 27,1990,1 ordered the clerk to remand this case to the Superior Court for Worcester County, Massachusetts. The defendants have moved for a reconsideration of this order. The plaintiff has moved for expedited remand.
The defendants assert that this case arises under federal patent law and that as a a result the federal court has exclusive jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1338. 1 The plaintiff contends that none of his claims arises under the federal patent laws.
The…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Becher v. Contoure Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Laning v. National Ribbon & Carbon Paper Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1942
- Zemba v. RodgersNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1965
3Cited by5 opinions
- Massachusetts Eye & Ear Infirmary v. QLT Phototherapeutics, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2005
- Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Plaintiff/counterclaim Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Qlt Phototherapeutics, Inc., Qlt, Inc., Counterclaim Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Evangelos S. Gragoudas, M.D., Joan W. Miller, M.D., Counterclaim Appellants/cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2005
- Roach v. CrouchSupreme Court of Iowa · 1994
- Mannsfeld v. Phenolchemie, Inc.District Court, S.D. Alabama · 2006
- Mass Eye and Ear Inf v. QLT PhototherapeuticCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2005