Legal Opinion
Gen-Probe, Inc. v. Amoco Corp., Inc.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided April 24, 1996No. 95-0998JPublishedCited by 59 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO EXPEDITE AND CONSOLIDATE DISCOVERY; GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS; GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY
JONES, District Judge.
I.INTRODUCTION
On November 17, 1995, Plaintiff Gen-Probe, Inc. (“Gen-Probe”) filed an amended complaint naming as Defendants Amoco Corporation (“AC”), Amoco Technology Company (“ATC”), Gene-Trak Systems, Inc. (“Gene-Trak”), Gene-Trak Systems Industrial Diagnostics Corp. (“GTSID”), and Vysis, Inc. (“Vysis”) (collectively, “Amoco”); 1 the Center for Neurologic Study, Richard A. Smith, and Ivor Royston (collectively,…
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Seminole Tribe of Florida v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- United Mine Workers v. PenningtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Wilson v. Parker, Covert & ChidesterCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Good Hope Hospital, Inc. v. North Carolina Department of Health & Human ServicesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
- Adobe System Inc. v. Blue Source Group, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- Inman v. AndersonDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2018
- Victoria v. City of San DiegoDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2018
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.