Cox v. Snap, Inc.

Filing 116

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Liam O'Grady on 9/20/2016. (awac)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COD
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGI
I

Alexandria Division

!

i

SEP2 0

I
L'/!

CLERK, U.S. DiSTRlC; COLnTf
ALCXANDRiA, VIRGiiNiA

CURTIS COX,

Civil No. l;16-cv-9

Plaintiff.

Hon. Liam O'Grady

V.

SNAP, INC.,
Defendant.

Memorandum Opinion

This matter now comes before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment by
Defendant Snap, Inc. ("Snap") and Plaintiff Curtis Cox ("Cox"). Dkt. Nos. 84 & 91. The
Motions have been fully briefed and the Court held a hearing on the Motions on September 9,
2016. For the reasons outlined below, the Court finds good cause to GRANT Cox's Motion for
Summary Judgment and DENY Snap's Motion for Summary Judgment.

I.

BACKGROUND

In 2006, Snap was a small business looking to grow in the government contracting
commimity. At that time. Cox was a well-known figure in the industry. He was also the

President ofC^, an established government contractor.
Snap proposed a strategic business relationship under which Cox would provide

assistance promoting and marketing Snap in exchange for an option representing five percent of
Snap's total authorized shares. The terms of the proposed agreement were set out in a Letter

1