Marble VOIP Partners LLC v. Zoom Video Communications, Inc.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 MARBLE VOIP PARTNERS LLC, Case No. 23-cv-03619-JSW
8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S 9 v. MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE
PLEADINGS
10 ZOOM VIDEO COMMUNICATIONS, INC, Re: Dkt. No. 113 11 Defendant.
12 13 Now before the Court for consideration is Defendant Zoom Video Communications, Inc.’s 14 (“Defendant” or “Zoom”) motion for judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil 15 Procedure 12(c). (Dkt. No. 113 (“Mot.”).) The Court found the motion suitable for disposition 16 without oral argument, and took the matter under submission under Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). (Dkt. No. 17 126.) Having carefully reviewed the parties’ papers, considered their arguments, and the relevant 18 legal authority, the Court DENIES Zoom’s motion. 19 BACKGROUND 20 On June 24, 2022, Plaintiff Marble VOIP Partners LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Marble VOIP”) 21 filed this action against Zoom in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas,…