Legal Opinion
Group14 Technologies Inc v. Nexeon Limited
District Court, W.D. Washington
Decided March 26, 2024No. 2:22-cv-01354Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 4 GROUP14 TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 5 Plaintiff, 6 C22-1354 TSZ v. 7 ORDER NEXEON LIMITED, 8 Defendant. 9 10 THIS MATTER comes before the Court on a renewed motion to compel discovery 11 brought by plaintiff Group14 Technologies, Inc. (“Group14”). Group14’s motion, the 12 response of defendant Nexeon Limited (“Nexeon”), and Group14’s reply are set forth in 13 the parties’ joint submission pursuant to Local Civil Rule 37, docket nos. 65 (redacted) 14 and 68 (sealed). Having reviewed all papers filed in support of, and in…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Debbie Foltz, Consumer Action United Policyholders Texas Watch, Intervenors, and Tierney Adamson Kevin Snead Daniel P. Johnson, Intervenors-Appellants. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, an Illinois Corporation California Institute of Medical Research & Technology, Inc., a Foreign Corporation Dba Comprehensive Medical Review Ralph Householder Steven Becker v. April Jean Ho Jim Mathis, Plaintiffs-Intervenors. Debbie Foltz, and Tierney Adamson Kevin Snead Daniel P. Johnson, Intervenors-Appellants v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, an Illinois Corporation, and California Institute of Medical Research & Technology, Inc., a Foreign Corporation Dba Comprehensive Medical Review Ralph Householder Steven Becker v. April Jean Ho Jim Mathis, Plaintiffs-Intervenors. Debbie Foltz, April J. Ho Jim Mathis Tierney Adamson Kevin Snead Daniel P. Johnson, Intervenors, and Consumer Action United Policy-Holders Texas Watch, Intervenors-Appellants v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, an Illinois Corporation, and Steven BeckerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- MAI Systems Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Imax Corporation v. Cinema Technologies, Inc. Neil JohnsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.