Legal Opinion
Hubbell Inc. v. Pass & Seymour, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 18, 1995No. 94 Civ. 7631 (RWS)PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
Defendants Pass & Seymour (“Pass”) and Legrand S.A. (“Legrand”) have moved to dismiss the federal and common law trade dress claims of Plaintiff Hubbell Incorporated (“Hubbell”) pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 12(b)(6). In addition, Legrand has moved to dismiss the action against it for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of personal jurisdiction and lack of venue. In the alterna-: tive, Legrand moves for a change of venue to the Northern District of New York. Pass moves to dismiss the action for lack of venue pursuant to 12(b)(3) or, in the alternative, to…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Pilates, Inc. v. Pilates Institute, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1995
- Berman v. Informix Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1998
- Albert Fadem Trust v. Duke Energy Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2002
- Houbigant, Inc. v. ACB Mercantile, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1995
- In Re Collins & Aikman Corp. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.