Legal Opinion

Vision-Ease Lens, Inc. v. Essilor International SA

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided June 10, 2004No. CIV.04-2663 RHK/AJBPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

KYLE, District Judge.

Introduction

Preliminary relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 65 is a “drastic and extraordinary remedy that is not to be routinely granted.” Intel Corp. v. ULSI Sys. Tech. Inc., 995 F.2d 1566, 1568 (Fed.Cir.1993). Plaintiff Vision-Ease Lens, Inc. (“Vision-Ease”) seeks a preliminary injunction against Defendants Essilor International SA and Essilor of America, Inc. (collectively, “Essilor”) to prevent the introduction of a competing eyeglass lens. Vision-Ease alleges that Essilor’s lens is the result of a breach of a confidential…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Dataphase Systems, Inc. v. C L Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1981
  2. Beacon Theatres, Inc. v. WestoverSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  3. Watkins Incorporated v. Lloyd M. Lewis and Sandra G. LewisCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2003
  4. Hybritech Incorporated v. Abbott LaboratoriesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
  5. Gelco Corp. v. Coniston PartnersCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1987

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Perfect 10 v. Google, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2006
  2. Berry v. Hennepin CountyDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2020
  3. Select Comfort Corporation v. BaxterDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2022
  4. Zikar Holdings LLC v. RuhlandDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API