Legal Opinion

UATP IP, LLC v. Kangaroo, LLC

District Court, S.D. Texas

Decided May 24, 2022No. 4:21-cv-02478Unknown

1Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. □ pistrict Cou ee Sathois District of Texas ENTERED UATP BP, LLC, et al., § May 24, 2022 § Nathan Ochsner, Clerk Plaintiff, § § versus § Civil Action H-21-2478 § Kangaroo, LLC, et al., § § Defendants. § Opinion on Partial Dismissal A. Background. UATP IP entered a franchise with Kangaroo LLC, to operate a Urban Air Adventure Park. Urban Air is a jumping gym secured by a patent for its “adventure hub.” UATP IP terminated the franchise when Kangaroo failed to pay the royalty required under the agreement. UATP IP says that Kangaroo…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McFadin v. GerberCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2009
  2. Genetic Implant Systems, Inc. v. Core-Vent Corporation and Gerald A. NiznickCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
  3. Campbell Pet Co. v. MialeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
  4. Engelhard Industries, Inc. v. Sel-Rex Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1966

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

Powered by the Exa API