Legal Opinion

Arnold v. Treadwell

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided July 22, 2009No. 2:07-cv-10209PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (docket 73), DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (docket 84), DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (docket 85), DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE AFFIDAVITS (docket 100) AND DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO TAKE LIMITED DISCOVERY OF DEFENDANTS’ ATTORNEYS FEES SOUGHT (docket 87)

STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III, District Judge.

This is a claim alleging unfair competition in violation of § 43(a) of the Lanham…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Ginger Rogers v. Alberto Grimaldi, Mgm/ua Entertainment Co., and Pea Produzioni Europee Associate, S.R.L.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
  2. Tom Waits v. Frito-Lay, Inc. Tracy-Locke, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  3. Wynn Oil Company and Classic Car Wash, Inc. v. Michael F. ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
  4. Rosa Parks v. Laface RecordsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003
  5. Etw Corporation v. Jireh Publishing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2003

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lindley v. Puccino's, Inc.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2019
  2. Toth Gray v. Lamp Liter, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2019
  3. Yeager v. Innovus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API