Legal Opinion
Orenshteyn v. International Business Machines, Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided October 25, 2013No. 02 Civ. 5074(JFK)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION & ORDER
JOHN F. KEENAN, District Judge.
Before the Court is Defendant International Business Machines Corporation’s (“IBM”) motion for summary judgment. For the reasons that follow, the motion is granted.
I. Background
In a complaint dated July 1, 2002, Plaintiff Alexander Orenshteyn alleges that he is the sole owner of United States Letters Patent Nos. 5,889,942 (the “'942 Patent”) and 6,393,569 (the “'569 Patent”) for an invention entitled “Secured System for Accessing Application Services from a Remote Station.” The patents involve a system by which individual “client” computer…
2Cases cited28 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
- Jeffreys v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005
- Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Richard S. RASKIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the WYATT COMPANY, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Aqua EZ, Inc. v. Resh, Inc.; Resh, Inc. v. Aqua EZ, Inc. and Lowe’s Companies, Inc.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 2026
- NetSoc, LLC v. Oath Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2020
- Speedfit LLC v. Chapco Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2020