Legal Opinion
Ali v. Carnegie Institution of Washington
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 29, 2014No. Civil Action No. 2013-2030PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Re Document No.: 73
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Granting Carnegie’s Motion to Dismiss
RUDOLPH CONTRERAS, United States District Judge
I. INTRODUCTION
The present action arises out of the Plaintiffs claim that he was erroneously omitted as an inventor on five U.S. patents co-owned by the Defendant, the Carnegie Institution of Washington (“Carnegie”) and the University of Massachusetts (“UMass”), originally brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The Oregon court transferred the action to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Carnegie now moves to dismiss the Plaintiffs Amended…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Alden v. MaineSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Minnesota v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Ali v. Carnegie Institution of WashingtonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Yueh-Lan Wang Ex Rel. Wen-Young Wong v. New Mighty U.S. TrustDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Statoil Oil & Gas LP v. Abaco Energy, LLCNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2017
- Statoil Oil & Gas, LP v. Abaco Energy, LLCNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2017
- Agustin Benitez v. Western Milling, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.