Legal Opinion
Giuliano v. SanDisk Corp.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided April 29, 2016No. Case No: C 10-2787 SBAPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG, Senior United States District Judge
Plaintiffs, Alfred T. Giuliano, Chapter 7 Trustee to the Ritz Estate; CPM Electronics, Inc. (“CPM”), E.S.E. Electronics, Inc. (“ESE”); and Mflash, Inc. (“Mflash”), bring the instant antitrust class action against SanDisk Corporation (“SanDisk”), pursuant to § 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2. They allege that San-Disk fraudulently obtained two patents from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) in order to monopolize the market for NAND flash memory.…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Agri-Labs Holding LLC v. Taplogic, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2018
- KPR U.S., LLC v. LifeSync CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2023