Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. et al

Filing 92

MOTION for Summary Judgment Counterclaim Defendants Stanford University, Dr. Merigan and Dr. Holodniy's Notice of Motion and Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Motion Hearing set for 12/4/2006 02:00 PM in Courtroom 15, 18th Floor, San Francisco. (Rhyu, Michelle) (Filed on 10/27/2006)

Download PDF
Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. et al Doc. 92 Case 3:05-cv-04158-MHP Document 92 Filed 10/27/2006 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 COOLEY GODWARD KRONISH LLP A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW PALO A L T O COOLEY GODWARD KRONISH LLP STEPHEN C. NEAL (No. 170085) (nealsc@cooley.com) RICARDO RODRIGUEZ (No. 173003) (rr@cooley.com) MICHELLE S. RHYU (No. 212922) (mrhyu@cooley.com) Five Palo Alto Square 3000 El Camino Real Palo Alto, CA 94306-2155 Tel: (650) 843-5000 Fax: (650) 857-0663 Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY and Counterclaim Defendant THOMAS MERIGAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, Plaintiff, v. ROCHE MOLECULAR SYSTEMS, ET AL., Defendants. ROCHE MOLECULAR SYSTEMS, ET AL., Counterclaimants, v. THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY; THOMAS MERIGAN AND MARK HOLODNIY Counterclaim Defendants. Case No. C 05 04158 MHP COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANTS STANFORD UNIVERSITY, DR. MERIGAN AND DR. HOLODNIY'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT HEARING DATE: December 4, 2006 TIME: 2:00 p.m. DEPT: 15, 18th Floor JUDGE: HON. MARILYN HALL PATEL COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF MOTION & MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CASE NO. C 05 04158 MHP Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:05-cv-04158-MHP Document 92 Filed 10/27/2006 Page 2 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 COOLEY GODWARD KRONISH LLP A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW PALO A L T O PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on December 4th, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in Courtroom 15 of the above-entitled Court located at 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California, Eighteenth Floor, before the Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel, Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant, the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University and Counterclaim Defendants Thomas Merigan and Mark Holodniy ("Stanford") will and hereby do move for summary judgment in this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and Civil Local Rule 56. For the foregoing reasons, Stanford moves for Summary Judgment as follows: (1) RMS's ownership, license, and breach of contract claims are barred by the statute of limitations, laches and/or estoppel; (2) RMS has no ownership or license rights to the inventions at issue under the 1984 and 1991 Merigan Consulting Agreements; (3) RMS has no ownership or license rights to the inventions at issues under the 1988 MTA; and (4) RMS has no ownership or license rights to the inventions at issue under the 1989 Visitor's Confidentiality Agreement. This motion is based on the pleadings and papers on file in this action, this Notice of Motion and Memorandum of Points and Authorities, Declaration of Luis R. Mejia, Declaration of Mark Holodniy and Declaration of Michelle S. Rhyu and associated documents, filed and served herewith. Dated: October 27, 2006 COOLEY GODWARD KRONISH LLP By: /s/ Michelle S. Rhyu Attorneys for Counter Defendants The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, Thomas Merigan and Mark Holodniy 739928 v1/PA 1. COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF MOTION & MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CASE NO. C 05 04158 MHP

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?