Legal Opinion

Shum v. Intel Corp.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided April 29, 2009No. C-02-3262-DLJPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

D. LOWELL JENSEN, District Judge.

On February 20, 2009, the Court heard oral argument on Defendants’ renewed motions for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL). Having considered the papers submitted, the arguments of counsel, and the applicable law, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendants’ renewed motion for JMOL as to Shum’s state law claims, and GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants’ renewed motion for JMOL as to inventorship.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Factual Background

Plaintiff Frank Shum (Shum) and defendant Jean-Marc Verdiell (Verdiell) are optical engineers. They met in 1994 when both worked…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Chauffeurs, Teamsters & Helpers Local No. 391 v. TerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  2. Ward v. TaggartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  3. Richard C. Price v. Dale R. SymsekCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
  4. Ethicon, Inc. And Inbae Yoon, M.D. v. United States Surgical Corporation and Young Jae ChoiCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  5. Pannu v. Iolab Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Shum v. Intel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
  2. Copart, Inc. v. Sparta Consulting, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2017
  3. In Re Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) LitigationDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2010
  4. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2021
  5. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2021

5 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