Legal Opinion
Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. Syntronic AB
District Court, N.D. California
Decided September 16, 2021No. 3:21-cv-03610Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC., Case No. 21-cv-03610-SI 7 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ALTERNATIVE 8 v. SERVICE, AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO QUASH 9 SYNTRONIC AB, et al., AND MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 10 Defendants. Re: Dkt. Nos. 22, 32 11 On July 19, 2021, plaintiff filed a Motion for Alternative Service for foreign defendant, 12 Syntronic (Beijing) Technology R&D Center Co., Ltd. (Syntronic Beijing), pursuant to Federal Rule 13 of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3). Dkt. No. 22. Syntronic…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Daimler AG v. BaumanSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S. A. v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Data Disc, Incorporated v. Systems Technology Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
- Rio Properties, Inc. v. Rio International Interlink, Rio Properties, Inc. v. Rio International InterlinkCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.