Synopsys, Inc. v. Atoptech, Inc

Filing 596

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL AMENDED COMPLAINT; VACATING HEARING. Based on Synopsys's applications for supplementary registration, the Court finds Synopsys has effectively accomplished supplementary registration of t he previously unregistered material identified therein, and, consequently, is entitled to go forward on each of its remaining claims. The Court further finds the effective date of each such supplementary registration is the respective date of the corresponding basic registration. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on February 4, 2016. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
SYNOPSYS, INC.,

No. C-13-2965 MMC

13
Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS
FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL AMENDED
COMPLAINT; VACATING HEARING

14
v.
15
ATOPTECH, INC.,
16
17

Defendant.
/

18
19

Before the Court is defendant ATopTech, Inc.’s (“ATopTech”) “Motion to Dismiss

20

First Supplemental Amended Complaint,” filed January 29, 2016. Plaintiff Synopsys, Inc.

21

(“Synopsys”) has filed opposition, to which ATopTech has replied. Having read and

22

considered the papers filed in support of and in opposition to the motion, the Court deems

23

the matter suitable for decision on the parties’ respective written submissions, VACATES

24

the hearing scheduled for February 5, 2016, and rules as follows:

25

Based on Synopsys’s applications for supplementary registration, the Court finds

26

Synopsys has effectively accomplished supplementary registration of the previously

27

unregistered material identified therein, and, consequently, is entitled to go forward on each

28

1

of its remaining claims. The Court further finds the effective date of each such

2

supplementary registration is the respective date of the corresponding basic registration.

3

Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is hereby DENIED.

4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

Dated: February 4, 2016
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2