Legal Opinion

In Re Microsoft Corp. Antitrust Litigation

District Court, D. Maryland

Decided January 27, 2003No. MDL 1332, CIV. JFM-99-3897, CIV. JFM-00-2444, CIV. JFM-00-2446, CIV. JFM-00-2447, CIV. JFM-00-2451PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

MOTZ, District Judge.

Microsoft has filed a motion to dismiss certain complaints asserting state law claims. Specifically, Microsoft seeks to dismiss in their entirety the complaints filed in Howard v. Microsoft Corp., Moscowitz v. Microsoft Corp., Prentice v. Microsoft Corp., and Strickley v. Microsoft Corp., and the complaint in McCall v. Microsoft Corp. to the extent that plaintiffs in that action seek relief other than injunctive relief.

Microsoft’s motion will be granted in all respects. In an opinion issued on January 12, 2001, I deferred ruling on Microsoft’s motion to dismiss…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hicks Ex Rel. Feiock v. FeiockSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Assicurazioni Generali, S.P.A. v. Kenneth Neil, Assicurazioni Generali, S.P.A. v. Kenneth NeilCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1998
  3. Vacco v. Microsoft Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
  4. In Re Microsoft Corp. Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2001
  5. Davidson v. Microsoft Corp.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2002

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. In Re Digital Music Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2011
  2. In Re New Motor Vehicles Canadian Export Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2004
  3. In re Niaspan Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
  4. Sheet Metal Workers Local 441 Health & Welfare Plan v. Glaxosmithkline, PLCDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
  5. In re Processed Egg Products Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012

3 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