FiTeq Inc. v. Venture Corp.

Good Law
169 F. Supp. 3d 948·2016 WL 948941·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33484
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 14, 2016Case No. 13-cv-01946-BLFCalifornia10,380 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Freeman, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

[Re: ECF 313]

Though now almost unbelievable, this case began with a partnership between the parties to build a groundbreaking payment card that would combat fraud. FiTeq and Venture entered into an Operating Agreement (“OA”), pursuant to which each party had responsibilities: FiTeq was to design, develop, market, and sell the card, while Venture was to “seamlessfly] manufacture” it. ECF 199-26, OA Recitals. The agreement was highly sequenced, with ten milestones, each of which had up to nine component parts. See ECF 199-26, OA Exh. B.

The joint project ultimately failed, but the parties dispute which — and most importantly whose — action caused the failure. In the motion now before the Court, Defendants identify alleged inactions, failures and misrepresentations by Plaintiff that they deem the breaking point. On that basis, Defendants move for summary judgment in their favor on the following issues related to Plaintiffs claims: 1) that the OA precludes Plaintiffs lost profits and enterprise valuation damages; 2) that the fact *953 and quantum of those damages are speculative as a matter…

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.