Legal Opinion
Ali v. Carnegie Institution of Washington
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided May 28, 2013No. Case No. 3:12-cv-01764-SIPublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*1371OPINION AND ORDER
MICHAJEL H. SIMON, District Judge.
Plaintiff brings this lawsuit to correct the inventorship of five issued patents related to gene silencing. For the reasons stated below, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 18) is GRANTED IN PART AND DEFERRED IN PART, Plaintiffs Motion for Jurisdictional Discovery (Dkt. 30) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AND STAYED, and Plaintiffs request for a Rule 16 conference (Dkt. 33) is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
This case arises out of Plaintiff Mussa Ali’s claim that he was erroneously omitted as a named inventor on five patents: U.S. Patent Nos.…
2Cases cited82 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
77 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Cray Inc. v. Raytheon Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 2016
- (PS) Akbar Sr. v. SmithDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
- (PS) Gigena v. RyeDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
- (PS) Nguyen v. Napa Superior CourtDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
- (PS) Nguyen v. Napa Superior CourtDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2025
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.