Legal Opinion
Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Arch Associates Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 13, 1997No. Civil Action No. 95-1590PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
JOYNER, District Judge.
Before the Court is Plaintiff Hewlett-Packard Company’s Motion to Dismiss or Strike the Amended Answer and Counterclaims of Defendants Harbor Information Systems, Inc., AIM Technology, Inc., and C. Timothy Jewell. For the following reasons, the motion is granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
This action concerns the sale and distribution of Plaintiff Hewlett-Packard Company’s printers. On March 17, 1995, Hewlett-Packard Company (“HP”) filed the Complaint in the instant action against nine defendants, including Harbor Information Systems, Inc., AIM…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Mrs. Carmella M. Borelli v. City of ReadingCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Adams v. Gould Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
- Elizabeth Dole, Secretary of Labor v. Arco Chemical Company and Occupational Safety and Health Review CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Berger v. Edgewater Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Waterloov Gutter Protection System Co. v. Absolute Gutter Protection, L.L.C.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1999
- United States v. Union Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2000
- McCarthy v. Komori America Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2001