Legal Opinion
Amy v. Curtis
District Court, N.D. California
Decided October 26, 2020No. 3:19-cv-02184Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 “AMY”, et al., Case No. 19-cv-02184-PJH 8 Plaintiffs, 9 v. ORDER GRANTING FIRST MOTION TO STRIKE AND DENYING SECOND 10 RANDALL STEVEN CURTIS, MOTION TO STRIKE 11 Defendant. Re: Dkt. Nos. 97, 121 12 13 14 Before the court are plaintiffs’ motions to strike. Dkts. 97, 121. The matters are 15 fully briefed and suitable for decision without oral argument. Having read the parties’ 16 papers and carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, and 17 good cause appearing, the court rules as follows. 18…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Whittlestone, Inc. v. Handi-Craft Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Fantasy, Inc. v. FogertyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Freeman v. Quicken Loans, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012
- In Re Rawson Food Service, Inc., Debtor. Flav-O-Rich, Inc., Cross-Appellee v. Rawson Food Service, Inc., Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1988
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.