NetApp, Inc. v. Nimble Storage, Inc.

Good Law

41 F. Supp. 3d 816·2014 WL 1903639·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65818

United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 12, 2014Case No.: 5:13-CV-05058-LHK (HRL)California11,453 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Koh, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS

Plaintiff NetApp, Inc. filed this suit against Defendants Nimble Storage, Inc. (“Nimble”), Michael Reynolds, and former NetApp employees Daniel Weber, Sandhya Klute, Timothy Binning, Neil Glick, and Christopher Alduino (collectively, “employees”). See ECF Nos. 1 (Compl.), 34 (First Am. Compl.). Nimble, Reynolds, and the group of employees have each moved to dismiss all claims against them on multiple grounds. See ECF Nos. 40, 41, 42. NetApp has opposed all motions and requested jurisdictional discovery in connection with Reynolds. The Court held a hearing on the motions on May 8, 2014. The Court addresses all four motions together. Having considered the briefing, the oral arguments, the record in this case, and applicable law, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART the motions for the reasons stated below.

I. BACKGROUND

A. NetApp’s Lawsuit

NetApp and Nimble are competing companies in the data storage industry. First Am. Compl. ¶ 31. Defendants Weber, Klute, Binning, Glick, and Alduino are former NetApp employees who now work for Nimble. Id. ¶¶ 7-11. Defendant Reynolds is an Australian citizen and…

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.