Neo4j, Inc. v. PureThink, LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 3, 20215:18-cv-07182California2,459 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 NEO4J, INC., et al., Case No. 5:18-cv-07182-EJD Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO v. STRIKE 10 PURETHINK, LLC, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 93 11 Defendants.

Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants Neo4j, Inc. (“Neo4j USA”) and Neo4j Sweden AB (“Neo4j Sweden”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this action for trademark infringement, among other things, against Defendants and Counter-Claimants PureThink LLC, John Mark Suhy, and iGov, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”). Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion to strike the Seventh Affirmative Defense for Cancellation of Trademark Procured by Fraud and Ninth Affirmative Defense for Naked License Abandonment of Trademark asserted in Defendants’ Answer to the Third Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 91) pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). Dkt. No. 93 (“Motion to Strike”). The Court took the matter under submission for decision…

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.