Kittle v. Cynocom Corp.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND OPINION
MARBLEY, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Cy-nocom Corp’s (“Defendant”) Motion for Summary Judgment. For the following reasons, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.
II. FACTS
Because this matter is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, the Court views the facts in the light most favorable to Plaintiff.
Cynocom Corp. (“Defendant”) is a privately owned Florida corporation that provides Internet-based software applications. The company markets and develops iA-syst, an Internet based software solution designed to…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- James P. Smith v. Chrysler CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
- James F. BARNHART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PICKREL, SCHAEFFER & EBELING COMPANY, L.P.A., Et Al., Defendants-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Eschborn v. Ohio Dept. of Transp.Ohio Court of Claims · 2017
- Nance v. Lima Auto Mall, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2020
- Nathan Hice v. David J. Joseph Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
- Neuhardt v. Charter Communications, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2020