Legal Opinion
Biological Dynamics, Inc. v. Exokeryx, Inc.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided April 2, 2024No. 3:23-cv-01664Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 Case No.: 23cv1664 DMS (JLB) BIOLOGICAL DYNAMICS, INC., 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S 12 v. MOTION TO DISMISS 13 EXOKERYX, INC., 14 Defendant. 15 16 17 This case comes before the Court on Defendant’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff filed 18 an opposition to the motion, and Defendant filed a reply. For the reasons set out below, 19 the motion is denied. 20 I. 21 BACKGROUND 22 Plaintiff Biological Dynamics is a “leader in exosome isolation technology.” 23 (Compl. ¶ 2.) According to the Complaint, 24…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- United States v. Donald Lawrence Ritchie, Heather Horner, Claimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Iqbal v. HastyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- Nano Maldonado v. Tony Harris, in His Capacity as Acting Director of the California Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.