Legal Opinion

Synchronoss Technologies v. Dropbox Inc

District Court, N.D. California

Decided February 14, 2020No. 4:16-cv-00119Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 SYNCHRONOSS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Case No. 16-cv-00119-HSG 8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING DROPBOX INC.'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES 9 v. Re: Dkt. Nos. 435, 436, 449, 461, 465 10 DROPBOX INC., et al., 11 Defendants. 12 Pending before the Court is Defendant Dropbox, Inc.’s (“Dropbox”) motion for attorneys’ 13 fees. Dkt. No. 436 (“Mot.”). The parties also filed motions to seal portions of their briefs and 14 accompanying exhibits. Dkt. Nos. 435, 449, 461, and 465. For the reasons detailed below, the 15 Court DENIES Dropbox’s…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
  2. Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'NCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  3. Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2014
  4. Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
  5. Phillips v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API