Legal Opinion
Verinata Health, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided July 19, 2018No. Case No. 12-cv-05501-SIPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SUSAN ILLSTON, United States District Judge
Before the Court are the parties' post-trial motions (Dkt. Nos. 648, 649, 650, 661, 662, 666), plaintiffs' motion for a permanent injunction (Dkt. Nos. 660, 666), and two administrative motions to seal (Dkt. Nos. 684, 697). After hearing argument and considering the parties' materials, the Court rules as follows.
*1082LEGAL STANDARD
I. Motion for judgment as a matter of law
"A renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law is properly granted only if the evidence, construed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, permits only one reasonable…
2Cases cited96 opinions
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Jonathon Castro v. County of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
91 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Galinis v. Bayer CorporationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2020
- JLC-Tech LLC v. Luminous Global Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2025
- Turo Inc. v. City of Los AngelesDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2020
- Verinata Health, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020