Catalyst & Chemical Services, Inc. v. Global Ground Support

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the plaintiff “lacks standing to maintain this action” because its “corporate charter was forfeited” prior to the suit’s initiation
• denying motion for summary judgment on unfair competition claim and declining to decide matter when plaintiffs “provide no support for this motion in either their memorandum in support or reply” (citing LCvR 7(a)
• applying District of Columbia version of UTSA in concluding that where each parameter was publicly known, “the value of the specific combination of parameters must exceed the mere sum of the value of each individual parameter”
• first passage quoting State ex rel. the Plain Dealer v. Ohio Dep’t of Ins., 687 N.E. 2d 661, 675 (1997); second passage quoting Mangren Rsch. & Dev. Corp. v. Nat’l Chem. Co., 87 F.3d 937, 942 (7th Cir. 1996)
• explaining damages are required for a DCUTSA claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).