Angioscore, Inc. v. Trireme Medical, LLC

Good Law

70 F. Supp. 3d 951·2014 WL 4438082·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126229

United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 9, 2014Case No.: 12-CV-3393 YGRCalifornia5,323 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rogers, J.

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Certain Claims in Plaintiff’s Fourth Amended Complaint

I. INTRODUCTION

Now before the Court is defendants’ motion to dismiss certain claims in the Fourth Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 244 (“4AC”) of plaintiff AngioScore, Inc. (“AngioScore”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Dkt. No. 262 (“Motion”).) The Motion is fully briefed. (Dkt. Nos. 264 (“Opp’n”), 279 (“Reply”).) Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7 — 1(b), the Court deems the Motion suitable for decision without oral argument and therefore has vacated the hearing set for September 9, 2014. (Dkt. No. 287.) As set forth below, the Motion is Granted in Part and Denied in Part.

II. BACKGROUND

AngioScore is a corporation organized under Delaware law with its corporate headquarters and principal place of business in Fremont, California. (¶ 2.) 1 Ang-ioScore is a maker of balloon angioplasty devices whose principal product is called AngioSculpt. (¶ 46.) AngioSeore’s 4AC names as defendants one natural person and three business entities: (1) Dr. Eitan Konstantino; (2) TriReme Medical, LLC (f/k/a TriReme Medical, Inc.) (“TriReme”); (3) Quattro…

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.