Tam

Tam v. Qualcomm, Inc.

Good Law
300 F. Supp. 3d 1130
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaJanuary 16, 2018Case No.: 17–CV–710 JLS (AGS)California8,961 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Honsammartino, J.

Presently before the Court is Defendant Qualcomm Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint, ("MTD," ECF No. 5-1). Also before the Court are Plaintiff Kam T. Tam's Response in Opposition to, ("Opp'n," ECF No. 6), and Defendant's Reply in Support of, ("Reply," ECF No. 7), Defendant's MTD. The Court vacated the hearing on the motion and took the matter under submission pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7.1(d)(1). (ECF No. 8.) After considering the parties' arguments and the law, the Court GRANTS Defendant's MTD.

BACKGROUND

This case arises from a dispute between Plaintiff Kam Tam and his employer Qualcomm. Tam worked as a patent attorney for Qualcomm starting in 2004 and was promoted to Senior Patent Counsel in 2008. ("Compl." ¶ 5, ECF No. 1-2.) As a Senior Counsel, Tam was responsible for prosecuting Qualcomm's patents at the U.S. Patent Office. ( Id. ) Plaintiff states that he received positive ratings in his *1136 feedback from his supervisors and his legal knowledge was well-recognized in his department. ( Id. ) Plaintiff states that licensing patents was a significant area of business for Qualcomm, constituting approximately three quarters of Qualcomm's profits. ( Id. )

In…

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.