Legal Opinion
Polaroid Corp. v. Feely
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided June 22, 1995No. Civ. A. 94-12493-WGYPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
YOUNG, District Judge.
David Feely (“Feely”), the defendant here, moves to dismiss the declaratory judgment action of the plaintiff Polaroid Corporation (“Polaroid”) on the ground that either this Court lacks personal jurisdiction or, in the alternative, that venue is improper.
I. BACKGROUND
The jurisdictional facts are undisputed. Polaroid is the owner of a federal registration for the trademark PROCAM for use with “self-developing Photographic Cameras.” See Complaint, Exh. A. Polaroid filed its application to register this trademark (with a first use in commerce date of…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Ticketmaster-New York, Inc. v. Joseph M. AliotoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
- Jay A. Pritzker v. Bob YariCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Scott Rilley v. MoneyMutual, LLCSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
- Douglas Furniture Co. of California, Inc. v. Wood Dimensions, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 1997
- GSI Lumonics, Inc. v. Biodiscovery, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2000
- Bancroft & Masters, Inc. v. Augusta National, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 1998
- DMI Sales, Inc. v. Venta Airwasher, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2019
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.