Antonick v. Electronic Arts, Inc.,

Filing 288

ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer denying 194 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 235 Motion to Strike. (crblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/28/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 ROBIN ANTONICK, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. C 11-01543 CRB ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, GRANTING MOTION TO STRIKE v. ELECTRONIC ARTS INC, Defendant. / 16 17 Having carefully considered the parties’ papers, and their arguments at the motion 18 hearing, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Strike (dkt. 235) and DENIES 19 Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (dkt. 194). For the purposes of the summary 20 judgment motion, the Court rejects Defendant’s argument that Plaintiff is contractually 21 barred from recovering royalties should he prevail on the merits of his claims. The Court 22 finds that there are genuine issues of material fact as to (1) whether the Super Nintendo and 23 TurboGrafx games are in the same microprocessor family as the Apple II and (2) 24 Amendment VIII. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 27 Dated: January 28, 2013 28 G:\CRBALL\2011\1543\order re MSJ KK.wpd CHARLES R. BREYER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?