Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

E.D. Tex.

Plasmacam, Inc. v. Cncelectronics, LLC, et al al, No. 4:19-cv-00037 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 27, 2019)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division
Case No.
No. 4:19-cv-00037, Dkt. No. 39
Decided
August 27, 2019
Judge
Amos L. Mazzant, III, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. 24) is hereby DENIED
Length
3 pages

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Pending before the Court is Defendants CNCElectronics, LLC, Fourhills Designs, LLC, Thomas Lee Caudle, a nd Martha Jane Caudle ’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss PlasmaCAM’s First Amended Complaint under Federal R ule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (“Motion”) (Dkt. #24). Having considered the Motion and the relevant pleadings, the Court finds that the Motion should be denied. BACKGROUND On January 18, 2019, Plaintiff PlasmaCAM, INC. (“Plaintiff”) filed its First Amended Complaint (“Complaint”) (Dkt. #5).