Legal Opinion

Competitive Technologies v. Fujitsu Ltd.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided February 25, 2003No. C-02-1673 JCSPublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CORRECTED ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTIONS BY COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGIES AND UI AND DENYING AS MOOT FUJITSU’S CONDITIONAL CROSS-MOTION *

SPERO, United States Magistrate Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

On Friday, December 20, 2002, at 9:30 a.m., the following motions came on for hearing:

• Competitive Technologies’ Motion To Dismiss Under Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 12(b)(7) 1 ;

• The University of Illinois’(1) Motion To Dismiss Counterclaims 5-13 Pursuant To Rule 12(b)(1) And/Or 12(b)(6);(2) Special Motion To Strike Counterclaims 10-13 Pursuant To CCCP § 425.16; And(3)…

2Cases cited80 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. DoyleSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. Seminole Tribe of Florida v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  5. Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Cline v. Reetz-LaioloDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2018
  2. Sparrow v. Mazda American CreditDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2005
  3. Smith v. California Department of Highway PatrolDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2014
  4. A Slice of Pie Productions, LLC v. Wayans Bros. EntertainmentDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2005
  5. In Re Netflix Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2007

15 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