§Why CasetextPricing

Zenimax Media Inc et al v. Oculus VR Inc et al

RESPONSE

31 Cited authorities

  1. Peteet v. Dow Chem. Co.

    868 F.2d 1428 (5th Cir. 1989)   Cited 438 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an eighteen-month delay in moving to transfer was unreasonable

  2. Landry v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n Intern

    901 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1990)   Cited 412 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it would be "incongruous" to prohibit a RICO person to also be the RICO enterprise, but to allow the enterprise to be held vicariously liable

  3. Automed Technologies v. Eller

    160 F. Supp. 2d 915 (N.D. Ill. 2001)   Cited 123 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in a lawsuit against former employees, the former employer would be required to "particularize which of its secrets were allegedly misappropriated before [the court would] compel [the employer of the plaintiff's former employees] to reveal its own"

  4. Simpson v. Specialty Retail Concepts, Inc.

    121 F.R.D. 261 (M.D.N.C. 1988)   Cited 130 times
    Setting up balancing test for stays of discovery

  5. Advanced Modular Sputtering v. Superior Court

    132 Cal.App.4th 826 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 72 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that one of the purpose of the CCP §2019.210 disclosure is that "it enables defendants to form complete and well-reasoned defenses, ensuring that they need not wait until the eve of trial to effectively defend against charges of trade secret misappropriation"

  6. Witten Technologies, Inc.

    244 F.R.D. 676 (N.D. Ga. 2007)   Cited 63 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Denying leave to file third-party complaint because the addition of the third-party would expand the scope and create uncertainty in an already contentious discovery process

  7. Brescia v. Angelin

    172 Cal.App.4th 133 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 47 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the plaintiff sufficiently identified his trade secret in pudding recipe where plaintiff listed the 15 specific ingredients and their relative percentage of the total

  8. Mintz v. Mark Bartelstein & Associates, Inc.

    885 F. Supp. 2d 987 (C.D. Cal. 2012)   Cited 29 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding SCA permits AT&T to disclose subscriber information pursuant to subpoena, including date, time, originating and receiving telephone number for specified date range

  9. Switch Commc'n Grp. v. Ballard

    Case No. 2:11-cv-00285-KJD-GWF (D. Nev. Jun. 19, 2012)   Cited 20 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the defendant would not be required to respond to the plaintiff's discovery requests until the plaintiff "describes its alleged trade secrets with reasonable particularity"

  10. Sys. Prods. & Solutions, Inc. v. Scramlin

    CASE NO. 13-CV-14947 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 8, 2014)   Cited 17 times

    CASE NO. 13-CV-14947 08-08-2014 SYSTEMS PRODUCTS AND SOLUTIONS, INC., Plaintiff, v. JOSEPH SCRAMLIN, Defendant. HON. MARK A. GOLDSMITH OPINION AND ORDER (1) DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS (Dkt. 14) and (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO QUASH (Dkt. 21) I. INTRODUCTION In this breach of contract case, Plaintiff Systems Products and Solutions, Inc. ("SPS") alleges that Defendant Joseph Scramlin, its former employee, breached his employment agreement and fiduciary

  11. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 158,801 times   196 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  12. Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 26   Cited 96,831 times   669 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

  13. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,480 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

  14. Section 2701 - Unlawful access to stored communications

    18 U.S.C. § 2701   Cited 1,334 times   135 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person who "intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided ... and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage"

  15. Section 2019.210 - Action alleging misappropriation of trade secret

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2019.210   Cited 144 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Requiring party alleging misappropriation to identify trade secrets with reasonable particularity before commencing discovery

  16. Section 9 - Limitation or period of time in existing statute has begun to run before effective date

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 9   Cited 81 times

    When a limitation or period of time prescribed in any existing statute for acquiring a right or barring a remedy, or for any other purpose, has begun to run before this code goes into effect, and the same or any limitation is prescribed in this code, the time that has already run shall be deemed part of the time prescribed as such limitation by this code. Ca. Civ. Proc. Code § 9 Amended by Stats 2017 ch 561 (AB 1516),s 20, eff. 1/1/2018.