Legal Opinion
Visto Corp. v. Sproqit Technologies, Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided February 7, 2006No. C 04-0651 EMCPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS
(Docket Nos. 97, 124)
CHEN, United States Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Visto Corporation (“Visto”) has filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. Having considered the parties’ briefs and accompanying submissions, as well as the oral argument of counsel and good cause appearing therefor, the Court hereby DENIES the motion.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Visto owns several patents, including U.S. Patent No. 6,085,192 (the 192 patent) which concerns technology that allows wireless communications…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- University of Texas v. CamenischSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Makaeff v. Trump University, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2014
- John Bean Technologies Corp. v. Morris & Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2021
- Spectrum Products LLC v. GaoDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2021