Farhang
Farhang v. Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 M.A. MOBILE LTD., Case No. 3:08-cv-02658-WHO
Plaintiff,
ORDER ON MOTION FOR
v. ATTORNEY FEES AND MOTION TO
WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KHARAGPUR, et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 658, 659, 667, 678, 683 11 Defendants.
12 This long and complex litigation, and longer and more complex course of dealings between the parties, ended when I granted summary judgment in favor of defendant Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur (“IIT”) and against plaintiff M.A. Mobile Ltd. on September 5, 2019. Now before me are two more disputes. First, IIT moves for attorney fees, arguing that M.A. Mobile pursued its claim for misappropriation of trade secrets in bad faith. I disagree and will deny that motion. Second, M.A. Mobile attorney Sanjiv Singh moves to withdraw as counsel, while M.A. Mobile opposes that motion and asserts that Singh is obligated to represent it on appeal. For the reasons set forth below, I disagree that…