Legal Opinion

Oakley, Inc. v. Nike, Inc.

District Court, C.D. California

Decided December 18, 2013No. SACV 12-2138 JVS (MLGx)PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and for Judgment on the Pleadings (Fid 11-18-13) and DENIES Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Fid 11-18-13)

JAMES V. SELNA, Judge.

Defendant Nike, Inc. (“Nike”) moves for summary judgment as to Plaintiff Oakley Inc.’s (“Oakley”) claim for intentional interference with contractual relations, and judgment on the pleadings, or alternatively summary judgment, on Oakley’s unfair competition and declaratory relief claims. (Mot. for Summ. J. (“Nike MSJ”), Docket No. 94.) Oakley has filed an opposition. (Opp’n to Nike MSJ, Docket No.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Richards v. Nielsen Freight LinesDistrict Court, E.D. California · 1985
  5. Quelimane Co. v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co.California Supreme Court · 1998

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Discover Bank v. LemleyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  2. Albert Gregory Pinto v. Maha ViscontiDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2023
  3. Alexsei Durack v. Dermot GivensDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2024
  4. Discover Bank v. Maurie Lemley, et uxCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  5. Gudy Aguilar v. KTL, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2020

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API