Filed: Oct. 12, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 12, 2018
Summary: ORDER R. BARCLAY SURRICK , District Judge . AND NOW , this 12th day of October, 2018, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 88), Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 85), and all documents submitted in support thereof and in opposition thereto, and for the reasons stated in the Memorandum concurrently filed herewith under seal, it is ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff's Motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: a. Summary judgme
Summary: ORDER R. BARCLAY SURRICK , District Judge . AND NOW , this 12th day of October, 2018, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 88), Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 85), and all documents submitted in support thereof and in opposition thereto, and for the reasons stated in the Memorandum concurrently filed herewith under seal, it is ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff's Motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: a. Summary judgmen..
More
ORDER
R. BARCLAY SURRICK, District Judge.
AND NOW, this 12th day of October, 2018, upon consideration of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 88), Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 85), and all documents submitted in support thereof and in opposition thereto, and for the reasons stated in the Memorandum concurrently filed herewith under seal, it is ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's Motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:
a. Summary judgment is GRANTED in favor of Plaintiff as to Counterclaim I (Breach of Contract), Counterclaim II (Quantum Meruit/Unjust Enrichment), Counterclaim IV (Quantum Meruit/Unjust Enrichment), Counterclaim V (Promissory Estoppel), Counterclaim VI (Fraudulent Inducement), Counterclaim VII (Tortious Interference With Contract), and Count VIII (Tortious Interference With Prospective Contract), and these Counterclaims are DISMISSED.
b. Summary judgment is GRANTED in part in favor of Plaintiff on Count IV (Breach of Contract) as to Defendant Paul Downey's liability for retention of Plaintiff's Proprietary Information.
c. Summary judgment is DENIED on Counterclaim XIV (False Marketing) as to the issue of patent ownership.
2. Defendants' Motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:
a. Summary judgment is GRANTED in part in favor of Defendants on Count I (violation of the Lanham Act) as to the portions of that Count that are based on the alleged alteration of product test reports.
b. Summary judgment is DENIED in all other respects.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within 10 (ten) days of the date of this Order, the parties shall jointly advise the Court, in writing, whether any party seeks to maintain the Court's Memorandum issued herewith, or any portion(s) thereof, under seal, and, if so, the party or parties so seeking shall show cause for such sealing under the applicable legal standard.1
IT IS SO ORDERED.
