Sandoz, Ltd., Master Builders, Inc. v. Omware, Inc.

12 F.3d 1108 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. SANDOZ, LTD., Master Builders, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OMWARE, INC., Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-15783. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Oct. 6, 1993. Decided Dec. 15, 1993. Before: TANG, TROTT and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Sandoz, Ltd. sued Omware, Inc. for trademark infringement and unfair competition. The district court granted Omware's motion for summary judgment and denied Sandoz' Rule 56(f) motion to continue discovery. Sandoz appeals. 3 "A grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo to determine whether, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party, there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court applied the relevant substantive law." 1 Tzung v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 873 F.2d 1338, 1339-40 (9th Cir.1989). We have carefully reviewed the record and conclude appellant has presented…