Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 1, 2020

Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. v. Blackmagic Design Inc.

Judge
Vince Chhabria
Docket
3:20-cv-01302
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Intellectual PropertyCivil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Cedar Lane Technologies v. Blackmagic Design, Judge Chhabria granted motions to strike and dismiss infringement claims, dismissed those claims with prejudice, and issued an order to show cause.

Who this affects

Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. and its counsel; Blackmagic Design Inc.

What happened

In Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. v. Blackmagic Design Inc., the court granted Blackmagic Design’s motion to strike Cedar Lane Technologies’ Third Amended Complaint.

The court also granted Blackmagic Design’s motion to dismiss the induced-infringement and contributory-infringement claims in the Second Amended Complaint. It dismissed those claims with prejudice. Cedar Lane was ordered to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and why its counsel should not be sanctioned for alleged repeated violations of the amendment rule and misrepresentations to the court.

Judge Vince Chhabria ordered Cedar Lane to respond within 14 days and scheduled a hearing on the order to show cause. Blackmagic could respond within seven days after Cedar Lane filed its submission.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. v. Blackmagic Design Inc. · No. 3:20-cv-01302
Judge
Vince Chhabria
Date
Oct. 1, 2020

Rulings

The court granted Blackmagic Design Inc.’s motion to strike the Third Amended Complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15.

The court also granted Blackmagic’s motion to dismiss Cedar Lane Technologies Inc.’s induced-infringement claims and contributory-infringement claims in the Second Amended Complaint. The court dismissed those claims with prejudice, meaning the order states that they cannot be brought again in that form.

Order to Show Cause

The court ordered Cedar Lane to show cause within 14 days why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward. The court also ordered Cedar Lane to show cause why its counsel should not be sanctioned for repeated failures to comply with Rule 15 and for alleged misrepresentations about Rule 15 in submissions to the court.

Blackmagic could respond within seven days after Cedar Lane filed its submission. The court scheduled a hearing on the order to show cause for November 12 at 10:00 a.m. by videoconference. The opinion states that the reasons for the rulings were given on the record, but that explanation is not included in the provided text.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.