Finjan, Inc. v. Bitdefender Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 8, 20194:17-cv-04790California2,005 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 FINJAN, INC., Case No. 17-cv-04790-HSG

Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND

v. ANSWER AND DENYING

DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS TO SEAL

BITDEFENDER INC., et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 126, 127, 133 Defendants.

On August 16, 2017, Plaintiff Finjan, Inc. (“Finjan”) filed its complaint against Defendants Bitdefender Inc., and Bitdefender S.R.L. (collectively, “Bitdefender”). Dkt. No. 1. Bitdefender filed its answer and counterclaims on November 22, 2017. Dkt. No. 25. Bitdefender filed a first amended answer on May 8, 2018. Dkt. Nos. 78, 79. Finjan filed its answer to Bitdefender’s counterclaims on May 22, 2018. Dkt. Nos. 82, 83. On June 8, 2019, Bitdefender filed this motion for leave to file an amended answer, to include a counterclaim for breach of contract. Dkt. No. 127 (“Mot.”). Finjan filed its opposition to this motion on July 2, 2019, Dkt. No. 132 (“Opp.”), and Bitdefender filed its reply…

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.