Neo4j, Inc. v. Graph Foundation, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 29, 20205:19-cv-06226California3,219 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7

NEO4J, INC.,

8 Case No. 5:19-cv-06226-EJD Plaintiff, 9 ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND v. DENYING IN PART MOTION TO 10 STRIKE

GRAPH FOUNDATION, INC.,

11 Re: Dkt. No. 32 Defendant. 12

13 Before the Court is Plaintiff Neo4j, Inc.’s (“Plaintiff or “Neo4j USA”) motion to strike 14 Defendant Graph Foundation, Inc.’s (“Defendant” or “GFI”) Fourth Affirmative Defense for 15 Naked License Abandonment of Trademark; Fifth Affirmative Defense for “Right to Fork and Use 16 Neo4J Open Source under GitHub Terms of Service;” and Sixth Affirmative Defense for 17 Cancellation of Trademark Procured by Fraud in its Amended Answer to Complaint. Dkt. No. 31 18 (“Amended Answer”). The Court took the matter under submission for decision without oral 19 argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b). For the reasons below, Plaintiff’s motion is 20 GRANTED 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.