Roe
Zoom Imaging Solutions, Inc. v. Roe
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 2, 20222:19-cv-01544California9,023 words
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ----oo0oo---- 11 ZOOM IMAGING SOLUTIONS, INC., No. 2:19-cv-01544 WBS KJN Plaintiff, v. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE:
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
EDWARD ROE; MAXWELL RAMSAY; JON PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT,
CROSSEN; CORINNE FUERST; ANDREW DEFENDANTS ROE AND POWER’S
ALSWEET, KEVIN TOON; JASON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,
PEEBLER; ABIGAIL NEAL; POWER AND DEFENDANTS RAMSAY,
BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY LLC; BRYAN CROSSEN, PEEBLER, DAVIS, AND
DAVIS; MAURA LOPEZ; JEFFREY LOPEZ’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
ORLANDO; JESSICA HINTZ; and DOES JUDGMENT 1 through 100, inclusive, 19 Defendants.
21 ----oo0oo---- 22 Plaintiff Zoom Imaging Solutions, Inc. (“Zoom”) brings 23 this action against defendants Edward Roe, Maxwell Ramsay, Jon 24 Crossen, Jason Peebler, Bryan Davis, Maura Lopez, and Power 25 Business Technology LLC (“Power”),1 arising from defendants’