Portney

Portney v. Ciba Vision Corp.

Good Law
593 F. Supp. 2d 1120·2008 WL 5505516·2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106551
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 17, 2008Case SACV 07-0854 AG (MLGx)California5,417 words

Opinion

Opinion

Guilford, J.

ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS CIBA’S COUNTERCLAIMS PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(b)(6) OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO BIFURCATE ANTITRUST COUNTERCLAIMS PURSUANT TO FRCP 42, AND MOTION TO STRIKE CIBA’S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES PURSUANT TO FRCP 12(f)

Before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss CIBA’s Counterclaims Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6), or in the Alternative, to Bifurcate Antitrust Counterclaims Pursuant to FRCP 42, and Motion to Strike CIBA’s Affirmative Defenses Pursuant to FRCP 12(f) (“Motion”), filed by Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Valdemar Portney (“Plaintiff’). After considering the moving, opposing, and reply papers, and oral argument from the parties, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the Motion.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff filed this action in July 2007, alleging that Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff CIBA Vision (“Defendant”) is liable for breaching a 1994 licensing agreement between the parties. Plaintiff contends that the parties entered into the licensing agreement to allow Defendant access to patents and other specialized technology related to multifocal contact lenses, and that in exchange Plaintiff was to receive royalties…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.