Legal Opinion
Crown Cell Inc. v. Ecovacs Robotics, Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided September 6, 2022No. 3:21-cv-07890Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CROWN CELL INC, Case No. 21-cv-07890-SI 8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT'S 9 v. MOTION TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 10 ECOVACS ROBOTICS INC, Re: Dkt. Nos. 28, 35 11 Defendant. 12 13 Defendant Ecovacs Robotics Inc. (“Ecovacs”), filed the instant motion to dismiss the Second 14 Amended Complaint (“SAC”). Dkt. No. 28 (MTD). In response, plaintiff Crown Cell Inc. (“Crown Cell”), filed a Motion for Leave to file a Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) before the Court ruled 15 on the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Wilton v. Seven Falls Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.