Agrizap, Inc. v. Woodstream Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
ROBERT F. KELLY, Senior District Judge.
Presently pending before this Court is Defendant Woodstream Corporation’s (‘Woodstream”) Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Plaintiff Agrizap, Inc.’s (“Agrizap”) state law claims. For the following reasons, Woodstream’s Motion is granted in part and denied in part.
I. BACKGROUND
In 2000, Woodstream contacted Agrizap about the possibility of the two parties entering into a marketing and distribution agreement for Agrizap’s Rat Zapper Product. The Rat Zapper is a consumer product that consists of a plastic canister with a metal plate at the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
- Gibbs v. ErnstSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re Processed Egg Prods. Antitrust Litig.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2019
- Agrizap, Inc. v. Woodstream Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2007
- Marquinez v. Dole Food Company Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2020
- United States v. SUPPADistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2020