Legal Opinion

Lockheed Martin Corp. v. L-3 Communications Corp.

District Court, N.D. Georgia

Decided October 17, 2005No. CIV.A. 105CV902CAPPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

PANNELL, District Judge.

This matter is now before the court on Lockheed Martin Corporation’s (“Lockheed”) motion for permanent injunction against prosecution of the dupli-cative Texas action [Doc. No. 4]; L-3 Communications Corporation and L-3 Communications Integrated Systems, L.P.’s (collectively “L-3”) motion to dismiss or, alternatively, to transfer or stay [Doc. No. 13]; and Lockheed’s motion for leave to file a sur-reply and declarations responding to new evidence [Doc. No. 33].

As an initial matter, the court GRANTS Lockheed’s motion for leave to file a sur-reply and declarations…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,667 Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Helen Echo HayduCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1982
  2. Sutter Corp. v. P & P Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1997
  3. New England MacHinery, Inc. v. Conagra Pet Products Co.District Court, M.D. Florida · 1993

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lexington Insurance v. RolisonDistrict Court, S.D. Alabama · 2006
  2. RxWound, LLC v. Extremity Care, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2025
  3. RxWound, LLC v. Extremity Care, LLCDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API