§Why CasetextPricing

University of Pittsburgh of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education v. Varian Medical Systems, Inc.

Memorandum in Opposition re MOTION to Dismiss CORRECTED Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Claims Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12

42 Cited authorities

  1. Semtek International Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

    531 U.S. 497 (2001)   Cited 1,366 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "claim-preclusive effect" of a previous decision by a federal court sitting in diversity is governed by "the law that would be applied by state courts in the State in which the federal diversity court sits"

  2. Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp.

    456 U.S. 461 (1982)   Cited 2,472 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "full and fair opportunity to litigate" is satisfied by minimum procedural requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment

  3. Stewart v. U.S. Bancorp

    297 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 745 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs bear the “burden to amend their complaint” to assert claims that are not preempted by ERISA

  4. Wong v. Regents of University of California

    410 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 629 times
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding expert witness testimony where plaintiff failed to timely identify the witness "without substantial justification"

  5. Motorola Credit Corp. v. Uzan

    388 F.3d 39 (2d Cir. 2004)   Cited 442 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where “the parties' briefs assume that New York law controls . . . such implied consent . . . is sufficient to establish choice of law”

  6. Martin v. Brown

    63 F.3d 1252 (3d Cir. 1995)   Cited 316 times
    Holding that a sanctions order was final for purposes of the collateral-order doctrine even though the district court hadn't set the amount of sanctions

  7. Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Mineta

    534 U.S. 103 (2001)   Cited 77 times
    Holding that courts must examine standing sua sponte if it has erroneously been assumed below

  8. Intellectual Property Development, Inc. v. TCI Cablevision of California, Inc.

    248 F.3d 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2001)   Cited 199 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a licensee had an exclusive license even though the license was granted subject to a prior nonexclusive license

  9. Kaspar Wire Works, Inc. v. Leco Engineering & Machine, Inc.

    575 F.2d 530 (5th Cir. 1978)   Cited 378 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a consent judgment dismissing a prior declaratory judgment action alleging patent invalidity and non-infringement did not bar the defendants from contesting the validity of plaintiffs' patent because the parties did not specifically include the patent that was the subject of this lawsuit in their consent judgment

  10. Arachnid, Inc. v. Merit Industries, Inc.

    939 F.2d 1574 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 172 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "shall be the property of [Arachnid], and all rights thereto will be assigned by IDEA ... to [Arachnid]" was not a present assignment

  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 348,148 times   927 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 41 - Dismissal of Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 41   Cited 109,292 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such dismissal "operates as an adjudication on the merits"

  13. Rule 11 - Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 11   Cited 35,998 times   145 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "unrepresented party" to the same standard as an attorney

  14. Rule 19 - Required Joinder of Parties

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 19   Cited 9,572 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Holding a person must be joined if disposing the action in the person's absence may leave an existing party subject to a "substantial" risk of incurring inconsistent obligations

  15. Section 1295 - Jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

    28 U.S.C. § 1295   Cited 8,334 times   92 Legal Analyses
    Granting jurisdiction to the Federal Circuit over cases arising from executive agency board of contract appeals

  16. Section 281 - Remedy for infringement of patent

    35 U.S.C. § 281   Cited 645 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Providing that " patentee shall have remedy by civil action for infringement of his patent"

  17. Section 100 - Definitions

    35 U.S.C. § 100   Cited 613 times   97 Legal Analyses
    Defining a " ‘joint research agreement’ " as a written agreement between "2 or more persons or entities"

  18. Section 261 - Ownership; assignment

    35 U.S.C. § 261   Cited 428 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Holding that patent rights are "assignable in law by an instrument in writing"